Judgment A.S.Garg, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the acquittal of Sohan Lal accused and his son Joginder Pal alias Gurbax in an offence under Section 307/3251324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. 2. Sohan Lal accused and complainant Paras Ram PW.2 are real brothers. They reside in Gagandeep Colony, Basti Jodhewal, Ludhiana. Sohan Lal accused and his brother Paras Ram PW.2 had a dispute with regard to the partition of plot located in Balmiki Colony, Ludhiana. This plot is measuring 220 Sq. yards only. The parties had their separate houses in Gagandeep Colony. 3. Now the case of the prosecution is that on the night intervening of 20/21.6.1990, when Paras Ram was sleeping alone on the roof of his house, he received an injury on his head. When he got up he saw Sohan Lal and his son Joginder Singh alias Gurbax standing there armed with daggers. Gurbax gagged his mouth with a piece of cloth. Sohan Lal accused gave two dagger blow on both legs of Paras Ram. Gurbax gave fist blow to him on his mouth as a result of which two teeth from the left side of lower jaw were uprooted. Paras Ram raised an alarm. Thereupon Gurbax inflicted a dagger blow in his left arm pit. After inflicting injuries both the assailants ran away. On hearing the alarm Kashmira Singh had been attracted to the scene of occurrence and witnesses a part of the occurrence. He also took Paras Ram to Christian Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana. 4. The injured Paras Ram PW.2 was not being declared fit to make a statement for a long time and ultimately on the application made by SI Jagdish Singh PW.3 on 29.6.1990 i.e. after eight days of the occurrence, he was declared fit to make a statement. He recorded his statement Ex. PJ in which he narrated the aforesaid facts and circumstances. After making his endorsement Ex.PJ/1 he sent the same to the Police Station for registration of a case and on its basis formal FIR Ex.PJ/3 was recorded on 29.6.1990 at 7.35 P.M. On 4.7.1990 the Investigating Officer went to the scene of occurrence and prepared rough site plan Ex. PH. He also took into possession one cycle and one Gurgabi vide memo Ex. PK. He arrested the accused on 19.12.1990. 5. PH. He also took into possession one cycle and one Gurgabi vide memo Ex. PK. He arrested the accused on 19.12.1990. 5. Both Sohan Lal and Joginder Pal alias Gurbax, the father and the son were tried for an attempt to murder. Their plea was that it was on account of the dispute of 220 Sq. yards plot and the complainant wanted to pressurise the accused persons and that they did not inflict any injury nor any such occurrence took place. The learned trial Judge after appreciating the prosecution evidence acquitted both the accused of the charges framed against them. 6. In this appeal against acquitted we have perused the entire record. This is apparent that there were dagger blows on the legs and the injuries summarised from the record to be such : (1) Incised wound (L) between 4th-5th. ICS in the ant. and mid axillary line 2.5 x 1.5 cm. (2) Previously sutured wound on the lateral aspect of the left calf 6 cm in size. (3) Sutured wound on the left calf medial aspect 6 cm. (4) Sutured wound of the right calf lateral aspect 10 cm long. (5) Lacerated (R) eye brow 1.5 cm in size. (6) Left heanothrise 400 M.L. The patient was brought to the hospital on 21.6.1990 but his medico legal examination was conducted on 23.7.1990. Nothing is mentioned in this injury statement prepared in the Christian Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana that whether the injuries Nos. 1 to 6 were dangerous to life or the patient was unconscious. So the inordinate delay of eight days in lodging the first information report remains totally unexplained. In such a case the delay would be material to determine the matter against the prosecution. 7 Kashmira Singh PW the sole independent eye-witness of the occurrence was riven up and not examined. Paras Ram PW.2 claimed that he fell unconscious on reaching the hospital. In the absence of Kashmira Singh, no body knows how the injured reached the hospital. There is no connecting evidence with regard to removal of the injured to the hospital. 8. No injury is found in the armpit of Paras Ram as per the medico legal report. The injuries on the mouth and other parts of the body i.e. on the left and right calf are not mentioned in the oral testimony of Paras Ram. There is no connecting evidence with regard to removal of the injured to the hospital. 8. No injury is found in the armpit of Paras Ram as per the medico legal report. The injuries on the mouth and other parts of the body i.e. on the left and right calf are not mentioned in the oral testimony of Paras Ram. No injury is mentioned to have been caused on the eye brow. During the evidence, the fist blows given on the lips have been attributed to Sohan Lal accused rather than Joginder Pal alias Gurbax to whom it was attributed initially. It was almost a dark mid night and it is being claimed that the light was coming from the neighbour houses. 9. There are serious infirmities in the version of the prosecution. We do not find any reason to therefore with the order of acquittal passed by the learned trial Court. The same is upheld and the appeal is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.