SYED MOHD. SURUR ALI ABIDI Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

(2.) THE opposite party No. 2 was medically examined at K.G.M.U, Lucknow at 11,00 P.M. The medical report shows abrasion on the right side of the back. The patient was referred to Emergency Ward. It is argued by the learned Counsel for the applicant tha,t the whole FIR and the charge sheet have been filed in a mala fide manner. He further argued that no injury was re­ceived by the applicant and the document in this respect is a forged document be­cause Khokha of 315 bore was found on the spot which completely destroys the prosecution case.

(3.) IN support of his contention, learned Counsel for the applicant has cited Harishchandra Prasad Mani and others v. State of Jharkhand and another, 2007 (57) ACC 856 (SC) = 2007 (51) AIC 100 (SC) It was a case where the Court reached a conclusion -that there is not even an iota of evidence to con­nect the accused with the evidence and also there was no material to show that the poi-spn had been administered to the deceased. The next case cited by the learned Counsel for the applicant is Parminder Kaur v. State of U.P and another, 2009 (67) ACC 658 (SC) wherein the Court observed that the respondent could not show how the appellant could be benefited in any manner by changing the dates. Both the cases are distinguishable from the pres­ent case. I find no force in this petition, under section 482 Cr.P.C and it is accordingly dismissed. Petition Dismissed.