IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 1946 of 2007 (O&M) Date of decision: September 15, 2011 Darshan Kochar .. Petitioner Vs. Ravi Kochar and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. Vishal Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. A.G. Punjab/ A.N. Jindal, J Assailed in this petition is the judgment dated 9.7.2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Ludhiana, accepting the appeal filed by the accused- respondents against the judgment dated 10.9.2003 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana, convicting them under Sections 452/323/34 IPC and sentencing them accordingly. In brief, the allegations are that on 17.1.1998, at about 3.30 p.m. Ravi Kochar armed with hockey stick trespassed into the house of the complainant Darshan Kochar and inflicted blow on his head. In the meanwhile, Sunil Kumar inflicted sota blow on his back, as a result of which he fell down on the ground. Thereafter, the accused Prince Dhanda inflicted a knife blow on his left shoulder. On raising alarm the accused persons fled away. On the aforesaid statement, FIR was registered and investigated. On completion of the investigation charge report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was presented in the court. The accused were charged under Sections 452/323/324 read with Section 34 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution led evidence, statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and ultimately the trial court convicted the accused persons under Sections 323/324 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced them accordingly. However, in appeal, the judgment of conviction and sentence was reversed and the accused were acquitted of the charges framed against them. Criminal Revision No. 1946 of 2007 -2- The State has not preferred any appeal or revision and it is the complainant who has come up in revision. Arguments heard. Record perused. Having examined the impugned judgment, the evidence appears to have been appreciated in the right perspective. There is unexplained delay in lodging the FIR. The incident in this case took place on 17.1.1998 at about 3.30 p.m. and the FIR was registered on 18.1.1998 at about 8.30 p.m. The doctor made endorsement regarding unfitness of the injured to make statement during said period, as such, the delay certainly is fatal to the prosecution case. That apart, there are material contradictions in the ocular version and medical evidence. As per complainant, Ravi Kochar and Prince Dhanda inflicted blows on his left arm between the shoulder and elbow joints, and several blows were given with sota on his back by the accused Sunil Kumar. But, as per medical evidence only two injuries were found on the person of the complainant-injured i.e. on head and left arm. There is no injury on his back which is attributed to Sunil Kumar. As such, I have no hesitation to hold that the First Appellate Court has appreciated the evidence in the right perspective. No opinion different from the first appellate court could be formed in the given circumstances of the case. Further more, it is also well settled by now that if two views are possible, then the view favourable to the accused is to be accepted. No merits. Dismissed. September 15, 2011 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge