SIRNAM 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 learned counsel is that though an assault on the deceased is said to have been made by a number of accused persons but it has been specifically stated in the statement of Arvind, the first informant that the applicant was armed with an axe and had made the assault by the same weapon on the deceased. Counsel has drawn the attention of the Court to the post mortem examination report of the deceased, which indicates that no incised wound was caused to the deceased. Submission is that in the ordinary course, axe is a sharp edged weapon and if the same was used in the commission of crime, then there must be some injury on the body of the deceased in the nature of incised wound, which is normally caused by the sharp edged weapon. Further submission is that there is also no such evidence available on record which may indicate that the axe was not used in the usual manner and was used from the blunt side. Submission is that in this background of absence of any typical injury of axe on the body of the deceased case of the applicant appears to be distinguishable from the other co-accused, who may be said to be the authors of the injuries caused to the deceased and thereby causing his death.