village have witnessed the occurrence, not even one witness belonging to the village has been examined. Further, it was found that only PWs.1 and 3 took treatment at the hospital on the date of occurrence and PWs.2, 4 and 5 took treatment on the next day. The explanation offered by PW-4 that since they have scared of accused they went to their grandfather's house and hence, they have not gone to hospital on the date of occurrence has not found acceptance at the hands of trial Court. Though the evidence of PWs.1 to 5 and PW-12, Doctor have clearly revealed that PWs.1 to 5 sustained injuries, there were too many discrepancies in their evidences. While PW-1 himself has admitted in cross-examination that he did not know what was written in Ex.P1, complaint, the very complaint was doubtful and failure on the part of prosecution to examine the Head Constable who recorded the complaint was fatal to the prosecution case. There was no explanation on the side of prosecution for nonexamination of such Head Constable. Ex.P11, First Information Report, did not contain 'serial number' and there was no proper explanation and hence, the same was doubtful. Further, PW-13, Sub-Inspector of Police, who registered the case himself has conducted investigation and filed final report. Having received intimation from PW-12, Doctor, and wound certificate informing five cut injuries and five other injuries suffered by first accused, no case was registered by police. Trial Court has held that though there were more number of injured witnesses, their evidence could not be accepted since prosecution has
