Pankaj Naqvi, J. - (1.) WE have heard Sri A.K. Srivastava, learned A.G.A. and Sri Rajeev Upadhyay learned counsel for the informant and Sri Shiv Ram Singh, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Janardan Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent in support of the admission of the respective appeals preferred by the State and the informant respectively, which challenges the judgment of acquittal dated 04.11.2011 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge (Temporary Ex -Cadre Post), Court No. 2, Azamgarh in Session Trial No. 142 of 2002 acquitting the respondents of charges under sections 323/34, 325/34, 307/34 and 506 of IPC. The prosecution case originated on a written report (Exbt. Ka1) dated 03.06.2001 lodged by PW -3 (father of Nisar Ahmad, injured/PW -1) alleging that there existed previous enmity between the informant and respondents, namely, Hasan Raza, Ansar and Aftab on account of pending litigations, in which his son Nisar Ahmad (PW -1) used to do pairvi of the case. The said respondents conspired to kill the son of informant. It was alleged that on 26.05.2001 at about 4:00 P.M. while his son Nisar Ahmad (PW -1) was riding his scooter on way back to his house and was on way to Jiyanpur via Bakhalis Bazar and was yet to reach non -pakka road of village Alipur, the three respondents came in an Armada Car (Registration No. 54/A 0779), driven by respondent Ansar with other two respondents Hasan Raza and Aftab sitting next to him, near the scooter of PW -1 and upon exhortations of respondents Hasan Raza and Aftab that PW -1 be not spared today and he be crushed to death, respondent -Ansar Ahmad dashed the four -wheeler against his scooter, whereupon PW -1 was thrown out of his two -wheeler on the road. The respondents again reversed the vehicle and ran the vehicle over PW -1 and while they were in the process of again running -over the vehicle, the scooter got entangled with a tree, and upon noise and commotion generated in the process, accused persons fled from the scene of occurrence. It was alleged that upon arrival of Arman (PW -2) along with other persons, injured (PW -1) was taken to the District Hospital, wherein it was reported that he had sustained fracture in the pelvic region. As his condition was deteriorating, PW -3 the informant was advised to take his injured son to the hospital at BHU, Varanasi where it was alleged that as informant was busy in attending on the injured in the absence of other family members, no report could be lodged earlier, which was now lodged upon his recovery.
(2.) SURENDRA Upadhyay, Head Moharrir at police station - Jiyanpur, Azamgarh (not examined) registered the FIR (Exbt. Ka8) under his signatures, made entries in the General Diary, as is evident from the statement of PW -5 Inayat Ali, the I.O. Of the case, who identified the signatures of the said Head Moharrir. The prosecution, in order to bring home the charges, examined eight witnesses. PW -1, Nisar Ahmad was the injured - eye -witness to the occurrence. PW -2 Arman also claimed himself to be an eye -witness. PW -3 Abdul Haq is the informant and the father of the injured Nisar Ahmad. PW -4 Dr. B.N. Chaubey, the Medical Officer In -charge of District Hospital, Azamgarh examined the injuries of PW -1 on 26.05.2001 at 4:45 P.M., prepared the injury report under his signature (Exbt. Ka2). PW -5 Inayat Ali was the Investigating Officer, who identified the signatures of Surendra Upadhyay, the Head Moharrir at P.S. Jiyanpur, Azamgarh, who registered the FIR (Exbt. Ka8). PW -8 Dr. Amit Rastogi was the Orthopaedic Specialist in the hospital of BHU Varanasi, who also examined the injured on 27.05.2001. He stated that as the injured refused to undergo orthopaedic surgery, he, on his own request, left the hospital on 30.05.2001. PW -7 Gufran and PW -8 Arshad claimed themselves to be the eye -witnesses, but were declared hostile.
(3.) THE defence set up was the plea of denial and false implication.;