K.S. LODHA, J.—Appellant Vishnu Kumar has been convicted u/Sec. 325 I. P. C. but has been released on probation on his entering into a bond in the sum of Rs. 3,000/- (rupees three thousand) with a surety in the like amount for a period of two years by the learned Sessions Judge, Partapgarh by his judgment dated 2.2.1979. He has also been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 300/-(rupees three hundred) by way of compensation to the injured Shyamlal. Aggrieved of this he has come up in appeal. 2. The prosecution story briefly stated is like this. On 5th February, 1978, at 3.5 P. M., one Mangilal Joshi, resident of Dhanet Kalan lodged a First Information Report at Police Station Chittorgarh stating that on the night of 4th February, 1978 between 12 and 1 P. M., his son Shyamlal was at his well, where a Motor had been installed and a room had been constructed, to keep watch, when the accused Hazari, Mohan and Vishnu came there armed with lathies. A torch light was thrown at Shyamlal, whereupon he came out of the room. He saw the three accused armed with lathies and as soon as he came out the accused persons started beating him with lathies. Shyamlal raised cries which attracted Hazarilal, Bansi Ram and Jamnalal, who came to his rescue. It was also stated in the F. I. R. that while beating Shyamlal the accused were saying that his (Shyamlals) father had filed a suit regarding the land against them and therefore, they would decide the matter there and then. After rescuing Shyamlal, Hazari Lal and others brought him to his house where some DESI treatment was applied to him and later he was taken to the Chittorgarh Hospital, he was said to be unconscious and after he regained the consciousness this report was being filed. After registering the case and carrying out investigation the police put up a challan against the three accused for offences u/sec. 307 and 323 I.P.C. The matter was, therefore, committed to the Court of Sessions. Charges u/sec. 307, 325 and 323 I. P. C. and in the alternative for offences u/sec. 307, 325 and 323 read with Sec, 34 I. P. C. as also a charge under Section 447 I. P. C. were framed against them. The accused pleaded not guilty, therefore, they were tried. Charges u/sec. 307, 325 and 323 I. P. C. and in the alternative for offences u/sec. 307, 325 and 323 read with Sec, 34 I. P. C. as also a charge under Section 447 I. P. C. were framed against them. The accused pleaded not guilty, therefore, they were tried. At the trial the prosecution examined 7 witnesses and produced a number of documents, the accused pleaded alibi and also produced 9 witnesses in support of their plea. One Shri Ugar Singh Tehsildar, Chittorgarh was examined as a Court witness. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted the other two accused of all the charges and also acquitted the present appellant Vishnu Kumar from the charges u/sec. 307 & 447 I. P. C. but convicted him under section 325 IPC and gave him the benefit of probation. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor and have gone through the record of the case. It has been urged by the learned counsel for the appellant that the learned Sessions Judge has disbelieved the major part of the prosecution case, he has disbelieved he alleged three eye witnesses, he has also, therefore, acquitted the other two accu-sed holding that their presence at the spot was not established and their plea of alibi was believable. He has, however, convicted the present appellant Vishnu Kumar on the basis of testimony of the injured Shyamlal and in doing so he has ignored some salient features of the case. If those features and circumstance are taken into account, Shyamlals statement also becomes unreliable and he conviction of the present appellant could not have been based on it. The learned Public Prosecutor has, however, supported the findings of the learned Sessions Judge. 4. Having given my careful consideration to the rival contentions, I am of the opinion, that the contentions of the learned counsel for the appellant cannot be said to be without substance and I am satisfied that the guilt u/sec. 325 IPC has not been brought home to the accused-appellant Vishnu Kumar beyond all reasonable doubts. 5. It is the admitted case of the prosecution that this incident had taken place in the mid-night and Shyamlal states to have identified the accused persons in the light of a bulb which is said to be glowing outside the room. 325 IPC has not been brought home to the accused-appellant Vishnu Kumar beyond all reasonable doubts. 5. It is the admitted case of the prosecution that this incident had taken place in the mid-night and Shyamlal states to have identified the accused persons in the light of a bulb which is said to be glowing outside the room. He had admitted that there was no light in the room itself, strangely enough Shri Bansilal, Investigating Officer who had inspected the site states that there was a bulb inside the room but he did not notice whether there was any light on the service pole, out-side the room. The statement of Shri Bansilal is, thus, in conflict with the statement of Shyamlal and it, therefore, becomes highly doubtful whether there was any light out-side the room which may have enabled Shyamlal to identify the accused persons. This fact, further, gains importance when we find that the learned Sessions Judge has specifically found that the presence of the other two accused at the spot was not established and their plea of alibi had been substantiated. The State has not filed any appeal against acquittal. It may also be added that admittedly there is dispute and bad blood between the families of the injured and all the accused and, therefore, the possibility of false implication of the accused merely on the basis of doubt cannot be excluded. 6. The matter does not rest here, as already stated above the incident had taken place in the mid-night between 4th and 5th of Feb., 1978, the injured was not immediately taken to the hospital which was barely four miles away, which distance may be even less because P.W. 4 Mangilal, father of the injured first stated that the Chittrogarh (where the hospital is situated) is two miles away from his village Dhanet and then stated that it was four miles away from the village. The injured could immediately have been taken to the hospital, whereas it appears that it was at about 12 noon when he reached the hospital and his injuries were examined, there is no explanation for this inordinate delay. It may further be mentioned that even after reaching Chittorgarh at about 12 noon, First Information Report was not filed at the Police Station, Chittorgarh immediately and it was only at 3.5 P. M. that the matter was reported to the Police. It may further be mentioned that even after reaching Chittorgarh at about 12 noon, First Information Report was not filed at the Police Station, Chittorgarh immediately and it was only at 3.5 P. M. that the matter was reported to the Police. Thus, there was enough time for the injured and his father to manipulate the story. The explanation for not lodging the report immediately at the Police Station given by Mangilal is also not satisfactory, he has stated that he did not come to the police station till Shyamlal regained consciousness whereas Dr. Ravi Bhargawa P. W. 1, stated that when he examined the injured Shyamlal at 12 noon, he was not unconscious and was in senses. Looking to all these circumstances, the prosecution story, therefore, becomes highly doubtful. 7. No doubt, according to Dr. Ravi Bhargwa when he examined Shyamlal on 5. 2. 1978 at about 12 noon Shyamlal had about 7 injuries on his person, including bruises, multiple abrasions, swelling on his left wrist and depression on his left parietal region. The swelling and depression referred to above are found to be previous injuries resulting in the fractures on X-ray, but the question is how these injuries came to be caused to Shyamlal and who was responsible for them. That question has, however, not been satisfactorily answered by the prosecution and the story put forwarded by it, as already stated above, is highly doubtful and, therefore, the accused cannot be held guilty. On the basis of such evidence the prosecution story so far as the appellant Vishnu Kumar is concerned, may be true but there is a vast distance between may be true and must be true and all this distance is to be covered by the prosecution by clear and convincing evidence leaving no room for doubt. But in this case the prosecution has failed to cover the distance by such evidence. In these circumstances, the conviction of the appellant Vishnu Kumar under Sec. 325 I. P. C. cannot be maintained. 8. The result, therefore, is that this appeal is accepted, conviction of the appellant Vishnu Kumar under Section 325 I. P. C. is set aside and he is acquitted of that charge. Bonds regarding probation, if already furnished, shall stand cancelled.