- (1.) THIS government appeal arises out of the judgment of Addl. Sessions Judge (Court No. 6), Aligarh dated 20.3.2014, acquitting the three accused -respondents, under sections 307/34, 323/34, 452, 504 and 506 I.P.C. in S.T. No. 746 of 2006.
(2.) THE FIR of this incident dated 11.9.2005 at 7 -8 a.m. is said to have commenced on an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. allegedly given on 16.9.2005 by PW -5 informant Ram Singh. The prosecution case was that the injured Bhagat Singh had returned home after easing himself. Then the accused Jagvir alias Gabbar is said to have fired with a country made pistol. The other three accused Shiv Charan, Devi Charan and Har Charan gave Lathi -Danda blows. The trial court has acquitted the accused -respondents on the grounds that the FIR was registered after 17 -18 days and PW -1 Bhagat Singh has stated that the FIR was lodged after 20 days. The explanation that the accused stopped the informant from lodging the FIR has not been accepted by the trial judge. DW -1 Dr. A.K. Singh was produced who was a member of the Medical Board. He is said to have examined the injured Bhagat Singh. He found no injury on his person. No doubt, learned counsel for the appellant contended that this medical examination was done after 4 months and the injury which was minor in nature would have filled up by that time. Be that as it may, the trial judge has committed no error in law in recording finding of acquittal and it cannot be said that the finding of acquittal is perverse. Also an earlier cross report was lodged from the side of the accused -persons. There is no explanation of the injuries to the side of the accused any where in the prosecution case. So far as main accused Jagvir was concerned, the police has even recorded a finding that his implication in this case seems to be false and subsequently he was tried as a juvenile.
(3.) IN the aforesaid background, there is no good ground to interfere with the order of acquittal.;