JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. 1. The State of Himachal Pradesh standing aggrieved by the verdict recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Kangra at Dharamshala, whereby he reversed the findings of conviction recorded upon the accused by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (II), besides pronounced a verdict of acquittal upon them, stands hence constrained to institute the instant appeal herebefore. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 29.03.1998 one Hakam Chand was working as room attendant in a restaurant at Dharamsala owned and managed by Punjab Tourism Report. At about 9.45 some customers came and complainant was directed by the Manager of the concerned resort to show the rooms to the customers. After the rooms were shown and the customers opted to occupy that room Hakam Chand went out to bring his luggage. In the meantime some other customers came who inquired about availability of rooms and charges. In the meantime the accused, who were employees of Hotel Ishan Resort came and told that they were charging 100/- only for the night stay in their hotel. The room attendant Hakam Chand called the Manager namely Pritam Chand and told him that their customers are not being permitted by the accused party to come to their restaurant. The Manager of Ishaan Resort Madhu Sudan told Pritam Chand that he would beat him. At this Pritam Chand went inside the resort whereas the accused started giving beatings to the complainant. All the accused, namely, Kamal, Amit, Kapil, Madhu Sudan and one another boy came there and administered him beatings. His uniform was also torn. In this scuffle he also lost his golden chain and money which were in his pocket. He had also suffered injuries. The manager informed the police on the basis of which F.I.R was registered and after completing all codal formalities and on conclusion of the investigation into the offences, allegedly committed by the accused, challan was prepared and filed in the Court. 3. A charge stood put to the accused by the learned trial Court for theirs committing offences punishable under Sections 341, 353 and 332 read with Section 34 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 7 witnesses. 3. A charge stood put to the accused by the learned trial Court for theirs committing offences punishable under Sections 341, 353 and 332 read with Section 34 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 7 witnesses. On closure of prosecution evidence, the statements of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, were recorded in which they pleaded innocence and claimed false implication. They did not choose to lead evidence in defence. 5. On an appraisal of the evidence on record, the learned Appellate Court returned findings of acquittal in favour of the accused. 6. The learned Deputy Advocate General has concertedly and vigorously contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned Appellate Court standing not based on a proper appreciation of evidence on record, rather, theirs standing sequelled by gross mis-appreciation of material on record. Hence, he contends qua the findings of acquittal warranting reversal by this Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction and theirs standing replaced by findings of conviction. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents has with considerable force and vigour contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the Court below standing based on a mature and balanced appreciation of evidence on record and theirs not necessitating interference, rather theirs meriting vindication. 8. 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. 9. The principal accused one Mr. Madhu Sood did not come to be subjected to trial as he stood declared a proclaimed offender. The co-accused alongwith him are alleged to share a common mens rea with him in theirs subjecting him to severe belabourings also the victim in his apposite complaint, has enunciated therein qua in the alleged assault, his clothes comprised in pant Ext.P-1, shirt Ext.P-2 and Banyan Ext.P-3 also begetting tearings. The prosecution is enjoined to by clinching evidence prove all the apposite recitals embodied in the F.I.R. In the F.I.R, the victim had made a disclosure qua in sequel to his standing belaboured by the accused, his suffering loss of some money also his losing a golden chain. The prosecution is enjoined to by clinching evidence prove all the apposite recitals embodied in the F.I.R. In the F.I.R, the victim had made a disclosure qua in sequel to his standing belaboured by the accused, his suffering loss of some money also his losing a golden chain. However, the aforesaid recital to acquire an aura of veracity enjoined valid effectuation of recovery of money also recovery of a gold chain, both items whereof the victim stood deprived of. However, neither the sum of money nor the gold chain qua whereof the victim stood deprived of, in the alleged incident stood recovered at the instance of the accused by the Investigating Officer. Non effectuation of recovery of the aforesaid money and gold chain qua whereof the victim stood deprived of during the course of the alleged beatings perpetrated upon him by the accused, begets an inference qua his contriving the aforesaid factum. Even if the aforesaid factum stands inferred to stand contrived, the factum of the recitals/allegations embodied in the apposite F.I.R. qua his standing severely belaboured by the accused comprised in their conjointly inflicting blows on his head, chest and arms also stood enjoined to be proven by the apposite MLCs holding recitals therein in tandem with the recitals in respect thereto held in the apposite F.I.R. Apparently, the thrashing of the victim by the accused continued for about 5 minutes also the victim in corroboration qua the factum of the accused conjointly inflicting blows on his chest, head and arms also his thereon sustaining injuries hence stood enjoined to be in absolute commensuration thereof, proven by apposite reflections manifested in the MLC, prepared by the doctor concerned who subjected the victim to medical examination. However, Ext.PW- 1/A proven by PW-1 enunciates therein the hereinafter extracted injuries: 1. Abrasion over superanuary region was present. No bleeding was present, no swelling was present tenderness was present. The patient was advice for x-ray chest to rule out any fracture. 2. bleeding from right nostril was present, no perfusal bleeding clots were present no swelling was present. 3. Complain of pain in the back but there was no injuries, x-ray no fracture. Hence injuries were simple in nature. The patient was advice for x-ray chest to rule out any fracture. 2. bleeding from right nostril was present, no perfusal bleeding clots were present no swelling was present. 3. Complain of pain in the back but there was no injuries, x-ray no fracture. Hence injuries were simple in nature. Obviously therein though he pronounces qua the victim suffering abrasions on his chest nonetheless he omits to pronounce in conformity with PW-2 qua in sequel to his standing assaulted by the accused his suffering injuries on his head and arms, thereupon even if the testification of PW-2 qua his suffering injuries on his chest stand succored by Ext.PW-1/A yet the further testification of PW-2 corroborated by PW-3 and PW-7 qua all the accused while sharing a common intention conjointly for five minutes inflicting blows on his head and arms whereon he too sustained injuries also stood enjoined to stand reflected in Ext.PW-1/A. However, in Ext.PW-1/A it remains uncommunicated qua the victim suffering any injury on his head and on his arms, corollary thereof is qua in the victim complainant disclosing the aforesaid factum during his examination in chief, his thereupon hence grossly embellishing upon the factum of the accused severely belabouring him. Nonetheless, even if he has exaggerated an iotic portion of the relevant occurrence yet when he obtains succor from PW-1 qua injury No.1, his testification besides the testifications of PW-3 and PW-7 whose lend corroboration in respect thereof qua his version, cannot stand ousted whereupon a conclusion stands enhanced qua the prosecution proving the assault taking place at the relevant site of occurrence. However, the gravity of the embellishments resorted by the victim complainant besides by the purported ocular witnesses thereto, visibly does not halt here. It continues upto the victim complainant making a disclosure in the complaint besides his in tandem thereto in his testification also the purported ocular witnesses thereto in corroboration thereof, testifying qua in the relevant occurrence Ext.P-1 pants, shirt Ext.P-2 and Banyan Ext.P-3, suffering tearings. It continues upto the victim complainant making a disclosure in the complaint besides his in tandem thereto in his testification also the purported ocular witnesses thereto in corroboration thereof, testifying qua in the relevant occurrence Ext.P-1 pants, shirt Ext.P-2 and Banyan Ext.P-3, suffering tearings. The aforesaid factum stands belied comprised in PW-2 during the course of his examination in chief by the learned APP concerned, whereat he stood shown Ext.P-1 pants, shirt Ext.P-2 and Banyan Ext.P-3, his not making any echoings therein nor any observation stands recorded by the learned trial Magistrate qua thereat theirs displaying any tearings, corollary whereof, is, thereupon the version qua the factum aforesaid testified by the prosecution witnesses standing enfeebled also the apt connectivity inter se theirs recoverys under the apposite memo vis-à-vis their production in Court stands deestablished. PW-1 pronouncing qua blood oozing from the nostril of the victim thereupon with naturally the aforesaid exhibits warranting theirs acquiring stains of blood yet no observation stands recorded at the time when the aforesaid exhibits stood produced before the learned trial Court qua theirs holding any stain of blood. Apparently also the exhibits aforesaid stood undispatched to the FSL concerned for enabling the latter to record an opinion pronouncing thereon qua blood stains, if any, occurring thereon belonging to the victim. 10. Be that as it may, the complainant, in his complaint, had also omitted to disclose therein qua the relevant incident standing witnessed by PW-7. However, the prosecution for succoring the charge introduced PW-7 as its witness. Even if PW-7 stood introduced as a witness by the prosecution, his testification would not lose its efficacy, significantly if the prosecution had proven qua the aforesaid PW not recording his presence before the victim whereupon latter stood precluded to recite his name in the apposite F.I.R. rather had proven qua his witnessing the incident from some distance from the alleged place of occurrence, his being unsightable therefrom by the victim/complainant. However, in the testification of PW-3 there occurs an articulation qua, at the command, besides at the intervention, of PW-7, the relevant scuffle terminating, obviously when PW-7 was hence sightable by the victim complainant whereupon the effect of his omitting to record his name in the F.I.R, is qua the prosecution by sheer contrivance introducing him as a witness merely for erecting a false edifice qua the relevant occurrence. Significantly the factum of PW-7 not recording his presence at the relevant time of occurrence also gains strength from the factum of his contradicting the versions of PW-2 and PW-3 qua the relevant customers proceeding to occupy their rooms. 11. In aftermath, the machination of the prosecution, to, by introducing a witness who did not record his presence at the relevant sight of occurrence hence stood precluded to witness it hence invent the genesis of the occurrence, does also concomitantly firm up a conclusion qua the prosecution contriving the alleged incident. 12. For the reasons which stand recorded hereinabove, this Court holds that the learned Appellate Court has appraised the entire evidence on record in a wholesome and harmonious manner apart therefrom the analysis of material on record by the learned Appellate Court does not suffer from any perversity or absurdity of mis-appreciation and non appreciation of evidence on record, rather it has aptly appreciated the material available on record whereupon its judgment warrants no interference. 13. In view of the above, I find no merit in this appeal, which is accordingly dismissed. In sequel, the impugned judgment is affirmed and maintained. Record of the learned trial Court be sent back forthwith.