JUDGMENT : Sureshwar Thakur, J. 1. The State of Himachal Pradesh standing aggrieved by the verdict recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solan, whereby he reversed the findings of conviction recorded upon the accused by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan, 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 24.7.2001 around 4 p.m the accused went to the blood bank in the hospital at Solan at Room No. 14 where Dr. V.B. Sood was present. They had donated blood in the morning and in exchange of that blood was to be taken by them to be got administered to one of their patient who was admitted in the hospital and had been asked to come by 3.00 p.m. They having turned late by the time the technician and other officials had left the place thereby Dr. V.B. Sood who was Incharge of the blood bank could not provide blood thereby they misbehaved with him. They caught hold of him from the neck, used word of abuse and also threatened him. It has also been alleged that all the three accused were under the influence of liquor. Immediately some officials of the Medical Department assembled and the police officials from the nearby security room also turned up. The matter was reported at the police station, Solan. The case 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 353 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 12 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. 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 Additional 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 informant Dr. V.B.Sood in his apposite application comprised in Ext.PW-2/A, had unfolded therein the entire genesis of the prosecution case, in sequel whereof, the apposite F.I.R comprised in Ext.PW-10/D, stood registered with the Police Station concerned. In his application borne in Ext.PW-2/A, the informant did not mention therein qua the relevant incident standing eye witnessed by any ocular witness. In his testification embodied in his examination in chief, he did not make any disclosure qua the relevant incident standing eye witnessed by any of the purported ocular witness thereto. Consequently, the testifications qua the occurrence of the purported ocular witnesses, prosecution witnesses whereof deposed as PW-1 and PW-8 hence do not acquire the virtue of creditworthiness. The further effect of the prosecution introducing the aforesaid ocular witnesses to the occurrence is qua its apposite concert spurring from its intention to purvey a false leverage to the charge put to the accused also thereupon it concerting to through a stratagem employed by it hence invent an exaggerated version qua the occurrence. The solitary testimony of the informant, if holding a tinge of naturalness also when the evidence attendant therewith, endorses the version qua the occurrence deposed by the complainant hence it was sufficient to constrain this Court to render a finding of conviction against the accused. The solitary testimony of the informant, if holding a tinge of naturalness also when the evidence attendant therewith, endorses the version qua the occurrence deposed by the complainant hence it was sufficient to constrain this Court to render a finding of conviction against the accused. However, with the prosecution introducing invented witnesses to the occurrence also erodes the efficacy of the testimony of the informant who deposed qua the occurrence as PW-2. 10. Erosions qua the veracity of the testimony of the complainant embedded in his examination in chief stand highlighted by his in his cross-examination underscoring his acquiescence qua the factum of the accused demanding blood from him or beseeching him to release blood from the blood bank, for hence facilitating early resuscitation of their relative who then was in a critical condition. With PW-2 disclosing in his cross-examination qua his requesting the accused to with respect thereto meet him in his office at 3 O’clock, whereas theirs arriving at his office at 4 O’clock whereat he testifies qua the alleged occurrence taking place, does inherently hold a vice of falsity arising from the factum qua with his requesting them to record their presence, an hour prior to 4 O’clock, whereat they did not purportedly record their appearance before him, qua the complainant falsely echoing in his testification embodied in his examination in chief qua his refusing to purvey blood to them, refusal whereof prodded them to assault him besides actuated them to hurl abuses at him. Corollary thereof is qua the aforesaid factum colouring with a vice of falsity the entire unfoldments qua the occurrence held in the examination in chief of the complainant, thereupon the testification of PW-2 qua the occurrence does not hold any tinge of naturalness rather it does not acquire any virtue of creditworthiness. Dehors a vice of incredibility imbuing the testification of PW-2, the omission of the complainant to sustain his version qua the accused purportedly holding him from the neck also theirs dragging him towards the room, factum whereof for its acquiring sustenance necessitated his sustaining injuries or abrasions on his person, injuries whereof were required to stand borne on the apposite MLC prepared by the doctor concerned, on his holding him to medical examination. However, PW-2, the complainant did not get himself medically examined despite the fact qua the accused holding him from the neck and also theirs purportedly dragging him towards the room whereupon entailment of injuries thereon was imperative, contrarily when he did not permit his medical examination being conducted by the doctor concerned hence his ascriptions qua the accused qua theirs purportedly dragging him from the room also theirs holding from the neck, stands eroded of their probative efficacy. Moreover, the shirt of PW-2 as stood clutched by the accused whereupon he stood dragged also entailed some marks of tearing or blood to stand pronounced therein. However, the shirt of the complainant stood neither taken into possession by the Investigating Officer concerned nor obviously it came to be produced. Omission aforesaid of the Investigating Officer concerned, constrains a conclusion qua PW-2 exaggerating the version qua the relevant occurrence hence rendering his testification qua it to hold no creditworthiness. 11. 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. 12. 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.