JUDGMENT : 1. The present appeal, under Section 378 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed by the appellant-Gujarat Pollution Control Board against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 07.04.2007 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Junagadh in Criminal Case No.2678 of 1996 whereby, the learned trial Judge has acquitted the original accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 24, 25, 43, 44 and 47 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. 2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the respondents are running business of bleaching and washing printed sarees at Village Sabalpur, District – Junagadh, and they are directly or indirectly responsible and liable for the day to day affairs. It is the case of the prosecution that they were discharging their affluent which was untreated and hazardous to mankind and to environment and agriculturist and thereby the respondents have committed offences under Sections 24, 25, 43, 44 and 47 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. It is also the case of the prosecution that samples were taken and were sent for analysis and it was found that it do not meet with the prescribed standard. On the basis of the complaint filed, necessary investigation was carried out and charge-sheet was filed before the trial Court where the case was registered as Criminal Case No.2678/1996. The trial was initiated against the respondents. 3. To prove the case against the present accused, the prosecution has examined several witnesses and also produced several documentary evidence. 4. At the end of trial, after recording the statement of the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., and hearing arguments on behalf of prosecution and the defence, the learned trial Judge acquitted the respondents of all the charges leveled against them by judgment and order dated 07.04.2007. 5. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and order passed by the trial Court, the appellant-Gujarat Pollution Control Board has preferred the present appeal. 6. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. 7. 5. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and order passed by the trial Court, the appellant-Gujarat Pollution Control Board has preferred the present appeal. 6. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. 7. The only contention and allegation raised by the private complainant-Gujarat Pollution Control Board against the respondents that they were discharging filthy and polluted water which was untreated and was hazardous to mankind and environment and thereby committed offences punishable under Sections 24, 25, 43, 44 and 47 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. It is the case of the complainant that one Shri H.R.Joshi who was working as Assistant Law Officer with the Gujarat Pollution Control Board has filed the aforesaid complaint as per the papers received by him from the office. It is submitted that admittedly he never visited the place of the respondents before filing the complaint and as such he has no knowledge as regards discharge of polluted water. Consequently therefore, so far as the evidence of the complainant is concerned, the same are merely hear-say as he has no personal knowledge about the same. The prosecution has also examined PW-2 – M.S.Shukla at Exh.49. In his examination in chief, it is admitted that on 11.10.1995, he visited the unit of the respondents. He has consulted the said respondents and thereafter carried out the inspection work and issued notice that they were discharging polluted water in drainage situated outside their unit and they had also taken samples but no authorization was obtained. He has also admitted that he has collected sample from the outlet in the bucket. 8. It was contended by Mr.Amit Patel, learned advocate for the complainant that the judgment and order of the trial Court is against the provisions of law; that the trial Court has not properly considered the evidence led by the prosecution and looking to the provisions of law itself, it is established that the prosecution has proved all the ingredients of alleged charges against the respondents-accused. He has also taken this court through the oral as well as the entire documentary evidence. It is further submitted that the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Judge is based on inferences not warranted by facts of the case and also on presumption not permitted by law. He has also taken this court through the oral as well as the entire documentary evidence. It is further submitted that the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Judge is based on inferences not warranted by facts of the case and also on presumption not permitted by law. It is also submitted by him that the learned Judge has not properly appreciated oral as well as documentary evidence and thereby committed error by acquitting respondents for the alleged offence which requires to be reversed as such and the accused are required to be convicted as such and therefore, present appeal deserves to be allowed. 9. Per contra, Mr.Bhavesh P.Trivedi, learned advocate for the respondents accused has taken this Court through the entire evidence on record and submitted that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Judge is just and proper. It is further submitted that in view of the evidence on record, it cannot be said that the learned Judge has committed any error in acquitting the accused, and therefore, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed. 10. This Court has minutely perused the oral as well as documentary evidence available on record and gone through the judgment and order passed by the trial Court and also considered the submissions made by learned advocates for the respective parties. In view of the aforesaid evidence on record, the learned trial judge has rightly recorded that no case is made out against the accused, and consequently therefore, they have been acquitted. Even this Court has read the entire evidence in presence of learned advocates for the respective parties and thereby this Court is of the considered opinion that the trial Court was completely justified in acquitting the respondents of the charges leveled against them. There appears no stand to revert the findings recorded by the learned trial judge and to convert the acquittal into conviction. This Court finds that the findings recorded by the trial Court are absolutely just and proper and in recording the said findings, no illegality or infirmity has been committed by it. This Court is, therefore, in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the court below and hence find no reasons to interfere with the same. 11. This Court is, therefore, in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the court below and hence find no reasons to interfere with the same. 11. In the result, the present appeal is devoid of any merit and the same is hereby dismissed and the impugned judgment and order is confirmed. R & P to be sent back to the trial Court, forthwith. Bail bond, if any, stands canceled. No order as to costs.