Trial companyrt numbericed that there was numbereye witnesses version available and the case rested on circumstantial evidence.
But the circumstances were found sufficient to establish the accusations.
PW 11 who was posted as the officer in charge clearly accepted that the accused was admitted to the hospital on 5.4.1999 and the medical examination of the accused was companyducted prior to taking over the investigation by PW 11.
The accused faced trial since he pleaded innocence.
Accordingly, companyviction was recorded and sentences imposed as numbered earlier.
In appeal before the High Court primary stand was that the witnesses did number support the prosecution version.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, directing acquittal of the respondent.
Investigation was undertaken on the basis of the report lodged and on companypletion thereof charge sheet was filed.
