Bamb, w ho was carrying an iron ro d , Varun @ Vanu and Ansh u Chaudha r y, who were armed with ‘ dat a r ’ came there alongwith 9-1 0 unidentif i ed persons and inflicted injurie s to them. It is alleged that Gop i fired fro m his pistol at Vikrant Singh hitt i ng on his right shoulder. Visha l Chaudha r y is stated to have fired fro m his pistol hitting Lakhwinde r Singh @ Lucky on right side of his abd o men. Gulshan is stated to hav e fired a s h ot at Ajay Kumar on the right side of his abdomen. Prince i s alleged t o have fired on the left leg of Vi k rant. Abhishek is also stated t o have fire d at the complainant, but the shot missed him. It is furthe r alleged t h at Vishal and Gulshan fired m o re shots at the complainant, bu t the comp l ainant managed to save himse l f. Rinku (petitioner) is allege d to have i n flicted a blow with ‘ datar ’ to J a swinder Singh on his forehead . Chanchal is also stated to have inflicte d a blow with ‘ datar ’ from it s reverse side hitting the left thumb of Jas w inder Singh. Rishu Chaudhar y is stated t o have inflicted a blow with iro n rod on the left wrist of Rakesh. 3. Learned c ounsel for the petitioner subm i ts that the FIR in question ha s been lod g ed after consultation and there are various exaggerations in th e same. It h as been submitted that althoug h the petitioner is stated to hav e inflicted a blow with ‘ datar’ on the f o rehead of Jaswinder, but sai d Jaswinde r never got himself medically e xamined. Learned counsel i n this rega r d has drawn the attention of this Court to the statement o f Jaswinde r annexed with the reply date d 03.09.2024 filed by the State , wherein h e has categorically admitted th e said factum. It has, thus, bee n submitte d that in the absence of any co r roborative medical evidence, i t
