circumstances, where there is manifest perversity or apparent error in appreciation of evidence while recording fact findings. But, in the present case on hand, there is no such perversity or apparent error in appreciation of evidence by the appellate Court. On the other hand, this Court cannot convert the acquittal into conviction in view of the bar under sub-Section 3 of Section 401 Cr.P.C., but can order re-trial in extreme circumstances and cannot remand the matter. Here, I find no such circumstances for ordering re-trial of the case or remanding the matter. On the other hand, the evidence on record is totally discrepant on material aspect, which would creates any amount of suspicion on the prosecution case. Therefore, I find no merit in the contention raised by Sri Rama Gopal, learned counsel for the petitioner, to convert the acquittal into conviction. In view of the bar under sub-Section 3 of Section 401 Cr.P.C., it is difficult to restore the judgment of the trial Court while exercising the power under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. Hence, I find no merit in the revision and the revision deserves to be dismissed.
