Judgment S.I. Jafri, J. 1. GANGA Sahai, resident of village Kakaur, District Buland- shahar has come up in appeal against the judgment and order dated 28-10-1978 passed by Sri Rajendra Kumar Sharma acquitting the respondent Jai Prakash of the charges under sections 452, 323 and 325 IPC and sections 6 and 7 of the Untouchability Offences Act. 2. IN this case, Ganga Sahai appellant filed an oral report on 8-2-1978 at 8.15 A. M at Police Station Kakaur alleging that the respondent had assaulted him and his wife with kicks and fists on 7-2-1978 at 1 P. M. on his refusal to compound the case against Shiv Dutta Thereupon, a non-cognizable report of the occurrence was lodged at the Police Station and Ganga Sahai and his wife Smt. Somwati were sent to the Hospital from the police station through constable for their medical examination. The Medical Officer Incharge Civil Dispensary Kakaur, District Bulandshahar examined the injuries on the person of Smt. Somwati at 9.30 A. M. on 8-2-1978 and he found the following injuries on her person: 1. Contusion 2 1/2 cm x 2 1/2 cm on the outer surface of left upper arm in its upper l/3rd, 8 cm below the left shoulder joint. 2. Abrasion 1 1/2 cm x 2 cm just on the knee cap of left knee joint. The Doctor opined the injuries to be simple. 3. THE Doctor also examined the injuries on the person of Ganga Sahai and he found the following injuries on his person: 1. Abrasion 1 cm x 1/2 cm on the back of right elbow 3 cm below the (sic) process of right ulna bone c/o pain in lover front incisors. No marks of external injury visible on teeth. Gums of mouth chronic hyomtoea present. 4. ACCORDING to the opinion of the Doctor, the injury was simple. Ganga Sahai filed a Complaint against the respondent Jai Prakash in the court of Special Judicial Magistrate Bulandshahar on 28-2-1978 wherein after the statement of the complainant under section 200 CrPC, cognizance was taken on the said complaint against respondent Jai Prakash. 5. IN support its case, Ganga Sahai examined himself as PW 1 and Chandra Pal PW 2. No other witness was examined by the complainant. 6. 5. IN support its case, Ganga Sahai examined himself as PW 1 and Chandra Pal PW 2. No other witness was examined by the complainant. 6. GANGA Sahai PW 1 deposed that he was in employment at Delhi and his wife used to reside in his village Khawaspur, and during the intervening night of 2/3-2-1978 when his wife was at Delhi with him, his house was burgled at village Khawaspur by breaking open the lock. He suspected Shiv Dutta Sharma and named him in his report lodged at Police Station as a consequences of which Shiv Dutta Sharma and other pundits of the village, became inimical to him. He further stated that on 7-2-1978 at about 1 P.M while he was inside his house in his village alongwith his wife Smt. Somwati, accused Jai Prakash came at his house and asked him whether he would compound the case against Shiv Dutta or not, whereupon his wife replied that no compromise was possible without the presence of Shiv Dutta. Thereupon using abusive language, the accused dashed into his house and assaulted him and his wife Smt. Somwati with kicks and fists, and on hearing the alarm raised by him, Chandra Pal Balu. Koore Mal and Ram Singh were attracted towards the scene of occurrence and upon their intervention, he was rescued. He also deposed that before the assault, Jai Prakash had also threatened that he being Chamar, will not be permitted to dwell in the village if he would not come to terms with Shiv Dutta. He further stated that he went to the Police Station next day of the occurrence and dictated his report to the Head Constable but his report was not taken down by the Head Constable correctly. In cross-examination he denied the suggestion that Chandra Pal PW 2 was his nephew. However, from a Copy of Khatauni of 1383 Fasli filed by the defence, tit appears that Gariba and GANGA Sahai are brothers, being the sons of Chhida and therefore, it is apparent that Chandra Pal PW 2 being the son of Gariba is the nephew of GANGA sahai complainant. However, from a Copy of Khatauni of 1383 Fasli filed by the defence, tit appears that Gariba and GANGA Sahai are brothers, being the sons of Chhida and therefore, it is apparent that Chandra Pal PW 2 being the son of Gariba is the nephew of GANGA sahai complainant. Chandra Pal PW 2 has corroborated the evidence of Gana Sahai, stating that on hearing the alarm raised by Ganga Sahai and his wife Smt. Somwati, he alongwith Balu and others reached the house of Ganga Sahai where Jai Prakash was assaulting complainant Ganga Sahai and his wife. 7. IN this case the injuries alleged to have been inflicted on the persons of complainant Ganga Sahai and Smt. Somwati are of a very minor nature which may be manufactured or self inflicted. Moreover, the Doctor who examined the injuries of the complainant and his wife Smt. Somwati, has not been examined in this case to prove the injuries of the complainant and his wife. Besides, there is inordinate delay in lodging the First Information Report extending over 19 hours and no sufficient explanation had come forth from the complainant for lodging the First Information Report belatedly. Chandra Pal PW 2 is the nephew of Ganga Sahai as shown above and it is not at all safe to place any credence on his testimony without independent and corroborative evidence The complainant also did not examine Koora Mal and Ram Singh who according to him, had witnessed the occurrence. Under the circumstance the evidence of Ganga Sahai and Chandra Pal is not inspiring and their testimony cannot be safely relied upon for the conviction of Jai Prakash respondent. 8. THE trial court has also given good reasons in discarding the evidence of Ganga Sahai and Chandra Pal. THE finding arrived at by the trial court is well reasoned and convincing and therefore, no interference is needed in the order of acquittal passed by the trial court. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the notice issued to Jai Prakash respondent is discharged. Appeal dismissed.