fardbeyan , the opposite party no. 2 had put his thumb impression at the end of it and the same was converted into an F.I.R. Further, before the police also none of the witnesses had ever stated with regard to any particular person, muchless the petitioner about his role. The narration in the fardbeyan clearly reveals that the same could not have been written by the Investigating Officer as various minute details have been given with regard to the information being received by the opposite party no. 2 about the accident on telephone and him going to the hospital as also the timing of the incident. Thus, on an objective consideration and in the background of the facts stated hereinabove, the Court finds that the averments/allegations made in the protest petition which are totally different from what has been stated in the F.I.R. and that too, after almost one and a half months of the police submitting final form, clearly appears to be an after thought and for oblique reasons, as the law does not permit the same person to give two completely different versions of the same incident within a gap of just three months between the two. Thus, by such conduct, the opposite party no. 2 has made his contention in the protest petition completely unreliable.
