chief examination complainant identified the
accused, however, in cross examination complainant changed his
version and did not support the prosecution case and when
complainant ... Addl. P.P. also sought
explanation from the complainant for changing his version during
cross examination to which the complainant answered as under
after a lapse of three months, then he
completely took changed version by deposing that
statement made before ld. MM or before the Court
22nd December, 2006 further examination-in-chief was recorded,
when he changed his version and deposed that Yunus gave chura
to Noor Mohd ... same on his abdomen. However,
subsequently he again changed his version by saying that accused
Gulzar was trying to give chura blow and when
State has re-examined the witness again
being changed his version during cross examined, but he has denied
that two unknown boys had not brought ... much pressure PWs must have deposed or changed
their testimonies. PW2 has changed his version during cross
examination after supporting prosecution during examination-in-chief
house. In his crossexamination by the Ld. APP, the complainant
changed his version and stated that the accused Rohtash was
Page ... Church. In his cross
examination conducted by the defence, complainant again
changed his version and stated that the accused Rohtash was
apprehended from Mother Dairy
with Sh. Ram Avatar. It is
submitted that the prosecution cannot change its version at this
stage. It is further submitted that there is clear ... incident, while other denies it. Sh. Ram Avatar has also
changed his version as to which of the accused had used the knife
Charge Sheet talks about two versions of the
complainant Sh. Lalu Shah. The first one is the version in the form of
statement/complaint ... story as
summarized hereinabove. The second version is a changed
version/story which further adds to the ambiguities in the case file
None of the robbed articles of the complainant or their changed version
could be recovered during investigation. No efforts have been made to verify
accused.
19. It has to be understood that the complainant had changed his version
not once but thrice. In his initial complaint given ... same to him. However, during his examination-in-chief, he changed his
version for the first time and claimed that the accused was accompanied
with
recovered from accused Manjeet facing trial in this case, his
changed version that his mobile was recovered from accused Ashwani
cannot be made basis
