of assaulting Raj Kali Devi against petitioner no. 4 and 3 by means of lathi but the doctor only found pain in whole body of Raj Kali Devi and as per injury report of Raj Kali Devi, the nature of injury is simple, caused by hard and blunt substance, as mentioned in para 11 of the petition, which clearly falsifies the story of prosecution. He further submits that though the version of FIR speaks that informant's mother also sustained injury in the said occurrence but there is no injury report of informant's mother on record, as mentioned in para 9 of the petition, which also falsifies the story of prosecution. He further submits that from perusal of injury report of injured, it appears that all the injuries are simple in nature. There is no repetition of blow by petitioner no. 4 against Birendra Ram which is clear from perusal of FIR itself. There is counter version of the case lodged by petitioner no. 1 Sita Devi who is the wife of petitioner no. 3. From perusal of the FIR, it appears that there is delay of two days in lodging the FIR and no plausible explanation has been given regarding the said delay. In the light of given facts and circumstances of the case, false and fabricated story cannot be ruled out. No offence is made out under Section 307 and other allied sections of the IPC, as mentioned in the FIR.