1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRI.APPLICATION NO.803 OF 2010 in CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. OF 2010 in CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders and Registrar’s orders. Ms.M.R.Tidke APP for Applicant Mr.Santosh Chari for Respondent nos.1 & 2. CORAM : N.D.Deshpande, J DATED : 24th January, 2011 P.C . 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State. This appeal is preferred by the State against the order of acquittal dated 25.6.2009 under sections 324 r/w 34 of IPC. Perused the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. This appeal is strongly opposed by learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2. The learned trial court has detailed the facts of the prosecution case in para 3 of the judgment. The evidence is discussed at para 7. It is also seen that parties are known to each other. Despite this, FIR came to be lodged after 3 days and there is delay in lodging the FIR. According to the trial court, the delayed FIR has proved fatal. There is no explanation. It is also observed that there is no independent witness examined. There is only direct evidence of PW 2 which is discarded by the trial court for want of corroboration. Sole testimony not believed. Even medical evidence also shows injuries caused are simple. It is also brought on record that there was dispute between the victim and the accused who had vacated the room and therefore it was held that it would be unsafe to convict the accused. All relevant factors were taken into consideration. The judgment and order of acquittal is supported with sound reasons. No interference is therefore called for in this appeal. Leave is refused. N.D.Deshpande, J N.D.Deshpande, J