APARESH KUMAR SINGH,J. - (1.) I.A. No. 424/2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner on the prayer for condonation of delay. We have also heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner on the merits of the matter where petitioner is seeking leave to appeal.
(2.) Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 12.08.2010 passed by the Court of Learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bermo at Tenughat in Compt. Case No. 210/2006 (T.R. No. 193/2010), whereby and whereunder opposite party No. 2 to 4 have been acquitted of the charges under sections 323 and 385/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
(3.) Prosecution story, as unfolded from the materials on record, discloses that on 21.06.2006 at about 10.00 AM accused Teklal Mahto and Chhoti Prajapati (O.P. No. 2 and 3) came to the house of the complainant and told him to come to their house where accused Seema Kumari was present. She wanted to talk with him and pacify the land dispute. The complainant accompanied them and reached Teklal's house where Seema Kumari was present along with two persons. She told the complainant that she had already purchased the land and asked him to leave the land. On refusal of the complainant, accused No. 1 and 2 became angry and started manhandling him. Subsequently, Seema Kumari asked the complainant to put his signature on the blank paper. On refusal, accused No. 1 and 2 started assaulting him and out of fear, he put his signature on the said paper. On 22.06.2006 the complainant came to know that accused persons fraudulently manufactured an application in the name of Circle Officer on the paper, on which they obtained his signature. When he went to the Police Station to lodge the FIR on 26.06.2006, the complainant saw some political persons on the side of the accused persons. Thereafter, he filed this complaint petition.;