and, as such, cancellation report was filed by the police. What happened thereafter is not evident from the record. Defence of this accused that he was hit with a stone, as a result of which, he fell down and became unconscious, does not inspire confidence. There is no material on record to substantiate such fact. One cannot lose sight of the fact that Nand Lal himself appeared as a defence witness. Medical record pertaining to treatment, which he undertook, was in his possession. Assuming that the police, despite his brother being in the police force and posted in the very same district, was not extending help, he could have himself produced such material in support of his case. But, then it was not so done. The photographs, so taken by him on the spot, cannot be said to have been proved in accordance with law. Krishan Lal (DW1), who claims to be a Photographer, has categorically deposed that the photographs (Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-5) were not developed by him. Also, no date/time is reflected in these photographs. Similarly, factum of telephonic conversation between the accused party and the police cannot be said to have been established on record, despite the testimony of Ramesh Kumar (DW-2), who admits not to have produced the original record pertaining to the person in whose name the said telephone was installed. Thus, the defence cannot be said to have been probablized.
