RAM BHAN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the Appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Admit and connect with Criminal Appeal No. 2056 of 2011.

(2.) SUMMON the lower court record.

(3.) IT is contended by the learned Counsel for the Appellant that, the role of causing injury by fire arm has been assigned to the Appellant and the co -accused Satya Veer. The injured had sustained injures on the right thigh and on the back side of the chest. The incident had taken place on 4.7.2009 at 9:00 pm but the first information report was lodged on 5.7.2009 at 9:30 am of which there is no explanation. The medical report does not corroborate with the prosecution case as there is blackening, but according to the injured witness that the assailants were at the distance of 200 meters when he received the fire arm injuries, which creates doubt about the veracity of the prosecution case. There is contradiction in the statements of the witnesses about the manner of assault. The other co -accused Satya Veer has already been granted bail by this Court and one co -accused had been acquitted by the trial court.