JUDGMENT Sureshwar Thakur, J. (Oral) - The instant appeal stands directed against the impugned judgement of acquittal recorded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kinnaur District, Camp at Rampur Bushahar, upon, Police Challan No. 4-2 of 2005, whereby he pronounced an order of acquittal, upon, the accused qua the offences in respect whereof, they stood charged. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 14.10.2004 at about 7 a.m, while Ganga Ram, complainant was going to board a bus, the accused after forming an unlawful assembly, were present on the road and they wrongfully restrained the complainant Ganga Ram and gave beatings to him. Accused Ajeet Singh inflicted a blow with Khukhari upon the complainant, whereas the other accused gave beatings to him causing grievous injuries to complainant Ganga Ram. Ganga Ram raised an alarm and on hearing his cries Kala Devi reached on the spot and saved the complainant from the clutches of the accused. The matter was reported to the police. The police referred the injured for medical treatment and taken into possession the nail cutter type knife and dandas, blood stained clothes of the complainant and after procuring the MLC of the injured and on completion of the investigation, into the offences, allegedly committed by the accused, the Investigating Officer concerned filed a report under Section 173 Cr. P.C. before the Court concerned. 3. Thereupon, the accused stood charged by the learned trial Court for theirs allegedly committing offences punishable under Sections under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 325 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 10 witnesses. On closure of prosecution evidence, the statements of the accused, under, Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were recorded wherein they pleaded innocence and claimed false implication. They chose to lead defence evidence. 5. The State of H.P. is aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal recorded, upon, the accused/respondents, by the learned Court below. The learned Additional Advocate General, has concertedly and vigorously contended that the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned Court below being not harbored upon a proper appreciation ''by it'' of the evidence on record rather theirs standing sequelled by gross mis-appreciation ''by it" of the material evidence on record. The learned Additional Advocate General, has concertedly and vigorously contended that the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned Court below being not harbored upon a proper appreciation ''by it'' of the evidence on record rather theirs standing sequelled by gross mis-appreciation ''by it" of the material evidence on record. Hence, he, contends that the findings of acquittal warranting reversal by this Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction and theirs being replaced by findings of conviction besides concomitantly, appropriate sentence(s) being imposed upon the accused/respondent. 6. On the other hand, the learned defence counsel has with considerable force and vigour, contended that the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned Court below being based on a mature and balanced appreciation ''by it'' of the evidence on record, hence theirs not warranting any interference, rather theirs meriting vindication. 7. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side, has with studied care and incision, evaluated the entire evidence on record. 8. The learned Additional Advocate General has contended that the affording, by the learned trial Court vis-a-vis the accused, the benefit of doubt being hinged, upon untenable grounds besides is engendered from its irreverence to the gravity of evidence of probative vigour hence necessitates interference by this Court. He has further argued that the findings of acquittal recorded upon the accused, for theirs allegedly committing offence(s) punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 325 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, being not anvilled, upon proper appreciation of evidence, as such, necessitate interference by this Court. 9. The instant case is hinged, upon, vivid and graphic narration qua the incident being rendered by the eye witnesses vis-a-vis the occurrence AND by the victim. The initial version qua the occurrence, is, embodied in F.I.R borne in Ext.PW-5/A. In the aforesaid exhibit, the accused are disclosed, to, by fist and leg blows hence assault the complainant. During the course of assault, the complainant testifies of his raising shrieks, shrieks whereof begot the arrival, of, Kala Devi at the site of occurrence. (i) Whereas in the FIR, the complainant, has specifically alleged that, upon, over hearing his shouts, one Kala Devi inquiring from, the accused the reason, for his perpetrating an assault, wherefrom it is apt to conclude of hers hence not eye witnessing the occurrence. (i) Whereas in the FIR, the complainant, has specifically alleged that, upon, over hearing his shouts, one Kala Devi inquiring from, the accused the reason, for his perpetrating an assault, wherefrom it is apt to conclude of hers hence not eye witnessing the occurrence. It is also alleged in the F.I.R, that, upon Kala Devi arriving at the spot, thereupon, all the accused fleeing from the spot, factum whereof also amplifyingly echoes of, though, upon hearing his cries, hers, arriving at the spot, yet, the fact of hers eye witnessing the occurrence is rather dispelled. (b) also the factum of hers making inquiries from the accused qua the reason of theirs assaulting the complainant, is also rendered incredible. The solitary testification of PW-1 with respect to the version, held in Ext.PW-5/A though would alone be sufficient, to, constrain this Court, to pronounce an order of conviction, upon, the accused, unless, on an incisive perusal thereof, echoings occur, therein, in display of his improving besides embellishing, upon, his version borne in Ext.PW-5/A or unless his testimony is contradictory vis-a-vis the testification(s), of, the eye witnesses, who, respectively deposed as PW-8 and PW-9. 10. In discerning, whether, the solitary testification of PW-1 is increditworthy, it is imperative to allude, to, the factum, that, in, Ext.PW-5/A (i) he had made a disclosure qua his being assaulted by three person(s), (ii) whereas in contradiction thereof, he, in his testification, borne in his examination in chief, ascribes, the relevant incriminatory role only vis-a-vis the relevant accused. In sequel the aforesaid fact, per se, comprises a blatant improvement besides a stark contradiction vis-a-vis his previously recorded statement in writing, (iii) corollary whereof, is qua his version qua the occurrence is rendered incredible. Furthermore, his rendered testimony before the Court, makes echoings, of the police taking into possession, a Khukri, (iv) whereas upon opening, of the apposite parcel, in Court, a nail cutter was recovered therefrom, whereas, he testified of his being not assaulted with user of nail kutter, yet nail kutter whereof stood produced in Court. (v) Thereupon an aspersion is cast qua the truthfulness of the prosecution case. (v) Thereupon an aspersion is cast qua the truthfulness of the prosecution case. Similarly PW-8 and PW-9, rendered statements, qua, theirs purportedly eye witnessing the occurrence, whereas PW-1 contradicts the factum of, availability of PW-8 and PW-9 at the site of occurrence, in contemporenity, to, his being assaulted by the accused (vi) whereupon an inference is erected of PW-8 and PW-9, hence recording their presence, subsequent, to the relevant assault, taking place, (vii) thereupon their testifications, displaying of theirs, eye witnessing, the accused assaulting the victim, hence, do not acquire any virtue of credibility. Sequel of the aforesaid incisive perusal of the testifications, of, PW-1, PW-8 and of PW-9, is, of the victim rearing a false case against the accused. The reason for the victim rearing a false case against the accused, stems, from the accused, proving, the factum of the victim rearing animosity against him, with, respect to the relevant path. 11. For the reasons which have been recorded hereinabove, this Court holds that the learned Court below has appraised the entire evidence on record in a wholesome and harmonious manner, apart therefrom, the analysis of the material on record, by it, does not suffer from any gross perversity or absurdity of mis-appreciation and non appreciation of evidence on record, rather it has aptly appreciated the material available on record. 12. In view of the above, I find no merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed. In sequel, the impugned judgement of the learned trial Court, is, affirmed and maintained. Record of the learned trial Court be sent back forthwith. Personal and surety bonds, if any, stand cancelled and discharged.