6.The injured is examined as PW1. He is declared hostile to the prosecution. He has deposed that he is unable to say the identity of the offenders who had attacked him. Ext.P1 is his first information statement. He has not disclosed the names to the police at the time of recording Ext.P1. PW2 is also declared hostile and denied the alleged fact that he could identify the accused. Ext.P2 is the mahazar. PW3 is the mahazar witness. Ext.P1 was recorded by PW4. He has given evidence that Ext.P1 had been recorded when PW1 was hospitalized. In cross-examination, it is brought out in evidence that one Ashraf had attacked him who is the not among the array of the evidence. As per Ext.P1, the defacto complainant had disclosed the identity of the offenders. But when he is denying such a disclosure, it is not possible for the court to decide the points in favour of the prosecution. First Information statement is not a substantiate piece of evidence in law. Accordingly, the accused are entitled to get an order of acquittal. Points are answered against the prosecution.
