Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4.3 The petitioner is examined as D.W.1 and he has deposed in his evidence that he is suffering from paralysis and he was not in a position to run from that place since the petitioner was not present at the relevant point of time. He has not ran away as he had no knowledge as to the carrying of these goods in his vehicle. 4.4 During the course of cross examination of D.W.1, it is not disputed that applicant is suffering from paralysis. Trial court in its judgment has observed that applicant is suffering from paralysis. On all these grounds, sought for allowing this revision petition.

- 10 -

materials to show that they have preferred the appeal against this judgment of acquittal.

9. In the evidence of D.W.1, he has clearly stated that he is the owner of vehicle bearing registration No.KA- 31/5579 and that he is suffering from paralysis and cannot walk properly due to paralysis and at the relevant time, he has not run away and as alleged by the prosecution, he was not present at the relevant time. During the course of cross-examination, the learned Addl. SPP disputed the fact that accused No.5 was paralysed at the relevant time. The Authorized Officer has observed in the impugned order that D.W.1 has not produced any medical documents to show that at the relevant point of time he was suffering from paralysis.