MUNNA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

(2.) Perused the record.

(3.) Submission of the counsel for the applicant is that the first version of the prosecution came after a prolonged delay, as the incident is said to have taken place on 26.2.2014 while the N.C.R. giving the information about the incident was lodged on 1.3.2014. Submission is that this prolonged delay has given the opportunity to the prosecution witnesses to improve upon and change the prosecution version and give out the same after due deliberation and concert. Learned counsel has further pointed out that even in the N.C.R. which was lodged on 01.03.2014 only the blunt weapons lathi and rod are alleged to have been used in the incident. Further submission is that the medical examination report of the injured would indicate that he has received incised woulds which can be caused only by a sharp edged weapon. Submission is that as admittedly to the prosecution the incident is said to have taken place in the mid night, the period when there was hardly any light, and therefore, the whole prosecution story was within the realm of conjectures as neither the injured nor the witnesses were able to identify the accused or the weapons used by them. That is the reason why such a prolonged delay has taken place in lodging the N.C.R. Contention is that the contradiction in between the N.C.R. and the medical examination report is sufficient to expose the falsity of allegations. It is further contended that though injured in his statement has tried to reconcile the medical examination with the prosecution story by attributing Gadasa but it is obviously apparent that it is an improvised statement. Further submission is that the alleged injured is leading a normal life and is out of danger. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. Learned counsel has emphasised upon the period of detention which the applicant has already undergone as he is languishing in jail since 24.7.2014 and there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court.