The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Babulal Dewangan 11 Cra/1241/2000 The ... on 16 January, 2018
6/IO altogether presented a different story, he deposed that
after the medical examinations, the complainant left the
hospital only to park his Rickshaw and he came back in the
evening at the PS. There is no whisper of this explanation
for delay in the testimony of any of the prosecution
witnesses, not even PW-1. The alleged incident happened
in June 2019 and testimony of PW-1 is recorded in the
court in February 2020, there is no apparent lapse of time
which could even justify that the complainant might have
forgotten about what material event followed on the
relevant day, especially when he was the victim of an
allegedly serious offence. Further, as per the tehrir which is
Ex. PW6/A, it was prepared at the police post, then when
and how the complainant went to the police post from the
police station, and why PW-1 omitted to depose qua such
facts also during his examination remained open to
interpretation. During the cross-examination, PW-6/IO at
one point deposed that after medical examination of all
injured and accused, they came back at the Police Post and
again at another point he deposed that the accused was
State Vs. Vikas Gupta
FIR No. 176/19
PS Kotwali
22/35
taken to the spot from the hospital at around 11-11:30 am.
Testimony of IO is not only contrary with depositions of
other prosecution witnesses but also with his own ocular
testimony.