that could be taken, interference with acquittal would be uncalled for. 3 (2003) 9 SCC 39 Page 5 of 21 Criminal Appeal No. 2129 of 20149. Bearing in mind the aforesaid decisions and the fact that the trial Court and the High Court are at issue on the question whether the respondents are guilty in the case on hand, we will proceed to consider the captioned appeal. Obviously, the trial Court relied on the oral testimonies of PWs 5, 8 and 9 whereas in the appeal the High Court found the oral evidence of PWs 5, 8 and 9 as unreliable. 10. Before dealing with the oral testimonies of the minor brothers of the deceased (PWs 5 and 9), we will deal with the oral evidence of PW-8, the mother of the deceased. She is the informant at whose instance FIR No.78/96 was registered against the respondents herein. Though she was believed by the trial Court, on re- appreciation the High Court found her unreliable owing to the material improvements and omissions made while being examined as PW-8. It was