Short Note : 1. The prosecution case was that on 21-10-1969 at about 7-30 P.M. when the complainant Jaisingh was returning to his house from behind after attending a case, he was surrounded by the applicant and another in front of his house. It was alleged that the applicant and others gave lathi blows to him and the other co-accused Adiram and others hurled stones on him. The learned Magistrate, after trial, acquitted all of them, but convicted the appellant and another under section 323 IPC. There was an appeal where the other accused was acquitted. This revision was filed by Govindsingh. Held: The first contention submitted by the learned counsel is that in-dependent eye-witnesses Avtarsingh and Vidyaram were not examined by the prosecution and therefore, the story of the prosecution should not be believed. It is not necessary to examine each and every witness who is only in dependant. It is only those witnesses who can relate fully the prosecution story need be examined. In this case prosecution has examined Jaisingh (PW 1) who himself has received the injuries and also examined Ramjan wife of Shiv Prasad as P.W. 2, there are other witnesses also, specially the medical evidence which corroborates the story given out by Jaisingh, therefore, the first submission of the learned counsel cannot be accepted. The second submission was there were four other persons also and they have been acquitted and, therefore, on the same evidence, the conviction of the applicant cannot be maintained This submission also has no force because there is a direct evidence against Govindsingh, it cannot be said to be a perverse finding nor it can be said that the conviction is bad for that purpose. Therefore the submission is of no consequence. Revision dismissed.