MAINPAL @ VEDPAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

(2.) It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that no time and date of alleged incident is mentioned in the FIR, which itself creates a doubt about the genuineness of the entire prosecution case. It is further contended that no specific role is assigned to the applicant or any other accused persons. It is further submitted that as per version of FIR, accused persons are alleged to have physically assaulted the injured and thereafter some highly inflammable substance is said to have been poured upon brother of the informant, which stands contradicted by the medical examination report of injured because apart from burn injury there is no other kind of injuries on the body of injured Pramod. It is further submitted that no incriminating materials have been recovered from the place of incident.

(3.) It is further contended that in the FIR as well as in statement of injured and even in the statement of informant no specific role is assigned to any of the accused person. It is only in the second statement of informant, for the first time, role of throwing the lighted matchstick has been assigned to co accused Beeram and co-accused Nathiram has been assigned the role of pouring some inflammable substances whereas applicant and co accused Sushil have been assigned the role of exhortation only. It is further contended that there is no independent witness of the alleged incident and the witnesses who have been examined are the interested witnesses. The applicant is in jail since 30.05.2021 and has no criminal history.