- (1.) RAJESHWAR Singh, J. This is a revision against acquittal filed by the complainant,
(2.) THE prosecution story was that there was a joint grove of the compla inant, deceased Shahdavan, Baqridi and seven opposite parties. THEre was some dispute about this grove. So a 'panchayat' was held in the evening and the 'panches' said that the persons concerned should live peacefully and should remain in possession as the\ are. People went away. At 8 p. m. on the same night that is on 4-4-1979 the seven accused persons came armed with lathi and pharsa. THEy attacked Shahdavan. To save him, complainant Sultan P. W. 1, Smt. Khadija P. W. 2, wife of Baqridi and Baqridi intervened. THEy also received injuries of blunt weapon. THE opposite parties went away. Shahdavan expired after a few minutes. THE police station was 8 miles away, so report could not be lodged in the night. It was lodged on the next morning at 8. 45 a. m. THEn the police made usual investigation including recovery of blood- stained earth from the spot and charge-sheet was submitted THE accused maintained that they were falsely implicated due to ill-will. THE Sessions Court acquitted the accused for the offence under Sections 147, 148 323 and 302 read with Section 149 I. P. C. So this revision has been filed by the complainant. There are three eye-witnesses in this case. They are the complainant Sultan P. W. 1, Smt. Khadija P. W. 2 and Khaliq P. W. 3 The first two are injured. There is medical evidence showing injuries on the persons of these two witnesses and one Baqridi. In the post-mortem report injuries were also found on the person of the deceased. These injuries are given below: Baqridi 1. Contusion 3 cm X 1 cm on the scalp. 14. 5 cm above the right ear. Colour of the contusion was not clear as something was painted. A small 0. 2 cm X 0. 2 cm scabbed abrasion present in the area of the contusion, colour not clear. 2. Contusion 4 cm X 2 cm, oblique in direction on there right upper arm, 8. 5cm to the elbow joint on the postero lateral aspect. Contusion violet in colour. 3. Contusion 4 cm X 4 cm on the left upper arm, on the posterior aspect, 11 cm to the elbow joints; contusion violet in colour, surrounded by swelling in the area 10 cm X 12 cm. Infected lacerated wound 3 cm X 2 cm X boue deep on the right lower leg; margins irregular on the antero medical aspect of the right lower leg, 20 cm below the knee joint. 4. Complains of pain on the rk-,ht said of the chest upper part. No external injury. 6. Complaints of pain on the right knee joint. No external injury. Smt. Khadija Khatoon 1. Infected lacerated wound 7. 5 cm X 0. 5 cm X scalp deep with irregular margin, semicircular in shape on the left side of the scalp, 6. 5 cm above the left ear. (2) Contusion 8 cm X 5 cm, violet in colour, oblique in direction, 8 cm above the inferior angle of the left scapular region. (3) Complaints of the pain in the left inguinal region. No. external injury present. Sultan (1) Scabbed abrasion 2. 5 cm X 0. 5 cm. black in colour on the anterior aspect of the left lower leg 15 cm to the left knee joint. (2) Scabbed abrasion 1. 5x0. 5 cm on the antero medial aspect of the left lower leg, black in clour, 7. 5 cm below the injury No. 1. (3) Swelling all over the left lower leg and foot more marked in the middle part of the lower-leg. Shahdavan (deceased) (1) Contusion over right side of scalp and fore-head, 2 cm away from right eyebrow, size 9. 5 cm X 5 cm. (2) Contusion over left side of scalp and face 1 cm away from anterior and of left eye-brow, size 11 cm X 7 cm. (3) Lacerated wound over front of right leg, 3. 5 cm above ankle joint size 3 cm X 1 cm X muscle deep. (4) Abrasion over back of right shoulder, size 2 cm X 1 cm. 4. It is very difficult to doubt the presence of the injured witnesses. Injuries may not be manufactured because two of the witnesses have got contusions on their scalp. The delay in F. I. R. was explained in the F. I. R. itself, when it was said that report could not be lodged on account of night One person had died and three others were injured, naturally there must have been fear in going to the police station.
(3.) HOWEVER, the learned trial Court first found fault with the F. I. R. saying that it could not be written in the village as said by the complainant. For this, first reason that it gave that it is written in the F. I. R. that the dead body had been left under the care of family members and the complainant had come for report. According to trial Court this would not have been dictated, had the F. I. R. been scribed in the village. But I do not find any such thing. When the|complainant know in the village that he would go to the police station leaving the dead body under the care of family members, there was no difficulty in dictating the same and getting it written in the F. I. R. Another reason is that according to the complainant, written report was prepared in the village at 2 p. m. by a stranger. This is somewhat improbable, but merely because F. I. R. was not written in the village and it was dictated at the police station, it cannot be said that the evidence regarding actual occur rence given by the witnesses, is false. There seems to be no evidence of the fact that the F. I. R was got prepared after advice by the police. Then the trial Court said that there is no independent witness. It is common knowledge that these days people are not willing to come forward to give statement against the persons who are powerful out of fear, specially when so-called witnesses do not gain anything from giving evidence. So evidence cannot be rejected simply on the ground that independent witnesses have not been examined but the evidence of the witnesses will have to be scrutinized with a little more caution to find out if they are speaking the truth about the occurrence.;