Learned counsel for the appellant-applicant has argued that the trial court has grossly erred in sentencing and convicting the appellant-applicant vide impugned judgment. It is submitted that initially, the author of the FIR has not named the appellant in the FIR, however, later on in his police statement, he has alleged that the appellant inflicted injury on his hand. It is further submitted that the police have recorded the supplementary statement of Sunil (P.W.-4), author of the FIR, however, in those statements, he has not alleged that the accused appellant inflicted any injury on his hand. Learned counsel has further submitted that in the Court statement, Sunil (P.W.-4) has specifically denied that in his initial police statement he stated that the appellant inflicted injury on his hand. It is also submitted that the as per the evidence of the eyewitnesses, the fatal injury on the deceased was caused by Gajendra and Prakash. It is further submitted that the sentence of the co-accused persons, namely, Rahul, Babulal and Dilip have already been suspended by this Court and the case of the appellant is not distinguishable from them.
