25.3.2008 Present: Mr.Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy.A.G. for the appellant. Cr.M.P(M) No.260 of 2008: Heard. This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment delivered by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla in case No.193/2 of 2004/2002 decided on 27.9.2007 whereby the respondents-accused have been acquitted of having committed offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323 read with Section 149 IPC. A complaint Ext.PW-1/A was made by Bela Singh, PW-2, and on the basis of this complaint an FIR Ext.PW-1/B was registered. Challan was put in the Court and after the evidence was led and arguments heard the learned trial Court acquitted the accused. The prosecution story, in brief, is that PW-2 Bela Singh on 2.11.2001 was called by two persons Papu and Kapil to the site of Gahan-Majhdharti road since there was a dispute going on between the villagers regarding the use of a JCB machine. The villagers were protesting that the said machine should not be taken to Bagini village. According to the complainant he intervened in the matter and persuaded the villagers and thereafter the machine started working. When he was coming to his house with Papu and Yeteshwar, the accused allegedly formed an unlawful assembly and in furtherance of a common object, Shishupal and Suresh gave a danda blows to him and other accused beat him. He was saved by Papu and Yeteshwar. Though according to the complainant the incident took place on 2.11.2001 and he lodged the complaint on the next day, a perusal of the complaint Ext.PW-1/A shows that in fact the complaint was made on 5-11-2001 and the FIR was also recorded on the same date. There is no explanation for the delay between 2nd November to 5th November, 2001. It has also come in the cross examination of the complainant that he had a telephone in his house and there were telephones in the houses of his neighbours, though according to him these were not functioning. This witness also admits in cross examination that the father of the accused had filed a civil litigation against his cousin and other villagers. Both the witnesses produced are closely related to the complainant. One other person Kapil who was an independent witness and was also allegedly accompanying him when the incident took place but has not been examined. The learned trial Court, on the basis of the evidence led before it, has come to the conclusion that there is no cogent or sufficient evidence to prove the guilt of the accused. He has pointed out various infirmities in the statements of the witnesses. Keeping in view the inimical relations between the parties, the unexplained delay in lodging the FIR and the contradictions and inconsistencies in the statements of the witnesses, I find no merit in the petition which is accordingly rejected. March 25, 2008. (Deepak Gupta), PV Judge