AVINASH SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed by the applicant-complainant Avinash Singh PW-1 under Section 378 (4) Cr.P.C. seeking leave to file an appeal against judgment of acquittal dated 22.3.2012.

(2.) Respondents No.2 and 3 were arrayed as accused in FIR No. 12 dated 10.2.2010 Police Station Phillaur, District Jalandhar. It was an allegation against them that they on 10.2.2010, had made an attempt to kill the applicant-complainant. The trial Judge has noted following facts regarding case of the prosecution :-

(3.) The Investigating Officer ASI Subhash Bath PW-3 recorded statement of the complainant Ex.PA and sent it to the police station whereupon above FIR was recorded against respondents No.2 and 3. The Investigating Officer then went to the place of occurrence, got prepared a rough site plan of the place with correct marginal notes. He also recorded statements of the witnesses. Accused were arrested in the meantime. On disclosure statements made, a revolver of .32 bore (Ex.P-2) along with two empties and four live cartridges were recovered from them. On completion of investigation, final report was put in Court. Copies of the documents were supplied to the respondents-accused as per norms. The case was committed to the competent Court for adjudication. The accusedrespondents were charge-sheeted to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution produced 7 witnesses and also brought on record documentary evidence to prove its case. On conclusion of the prosecution's evidence, statements of the respondents-accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Incriminating material existing on record was put to them, which they denied, claimed innocence and false implication. It was specifically stated by them that no incident, as alleged by the prosecution, had taken place. In the pending litigation, regarding partition of the land in dispute, stay order was granted by the Commissioner before the alleged occurrence. The respondents-accused also led evidence in defence.