through the trial court record. The perusal of the impugned judgment indicates that the learned trial court has minutely appreciated the testimony of the prosecution and has also taken into account the defence being put up by the appellant. The submissions made by both the parties have also been taken into account. It is pertinent to mention here that PW1, the complainant in his statement before the court has made a categorical statement on oath that on 21.05.2016 at about at about 7.45 a.m., he was going to a saloon situated at Radhey Puri, Jain Mandir and when he reached at the saloon and parked his scooty, two persons came on black colour bike and snatched his gold chain, which he was wearing in his neck. PW1/complainant stated that the chain was snatched by the pillion rider from the back side.The perusal of testimony of PW1 though indicates that there appears some inconsistency in his statement made before the court and his statement made to the police. In the statement made before the police, the complainant has simply stated when the chain was being snatched, he resisted on which the pillion rider took out a country made pistol and assaulted on his head. However, in his statement before the court, the complainant has stated that after snatching the chain, two persons on the bike fled away but he chased them and could caught the pillion rider as there was a turn after few distance.
