JUDGMENT Heard Perused. 2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order of conviction and consequent sentence imposed on the appellant/accused, a Police Constable, for the commission of offence punishable under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. The appellant/accused and the complainant were serving as Police Constables attached to Shivaji Nager Police Station, Nanded at material time. Incident occurred around noon in front of Shivaji Nagar Police Station on 5/7/2000. The complainant alleged that while he was chit-chatting with Police Head Constable Shri Kapure in the open place in Police Station campus, the accused accompanied by two other Constables, came out of the Police Station; and when he was casually called by one of them i.e. Police Constable Shri Hanwate to join them for a cup of tea, he refused to join them and all of a sudden, the accused made utterances "Knyou Re Kya Bola", pounced on him and mounted assault with a knife. According to the complainant, first knife blow was aimed at his head but he tried to avoid it, and as a result received slight injury on head, as the knife slipped across. Immediately, he disclosed, the accused gave second knife blow, which he tried to shield it with his right hand and consequently received injury to his right elbow, and about that time others namely Kapure, Vaidya, P.S.I. Parghane and P.S.I. Shinde and others intervened and saved him from further assault. 4. The victim lodged a complaint. A crime was registered at Crime No. 153/2000 under Section 307 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act against the appellant/accused at Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Nanded. The complainant was medically examined and his blood stained clothes were seized. Blood of the accused as well as the complainant was collected for further forensic investigation. Seized Articles were also sent to the forensic laboratory for further investigation. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. Scene of offence panchanama was drawn. Discovery of the knife used in the crime was allegedly made by the accused from a place within stair-case of stadium on 1/1/2001, and the knife discovered was also sent for further investigation to the forensic Department. 5. On completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was lodged in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nanded. Discovery of the knife used in the crime was allegedly made by the accused from a place within stair-case of stadium on 1/1/2001, and the knife discovered was also sent for further investigation to the forensic Department. 5. On completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was lodged in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nanded. In due course, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and charges under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under section 25 of the Indian Arms Act were framed against the accused by learned Sessions Judge, Nanded. The appellant/accused pleaded not guilty. 6. The prosecution examined the complainant, panchas, Medical Officer and the Police men who professed to be witnesses to the incident in question. Investigation Officer was also examined. The accused was examined as per provisions of Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. He denied his involvement in the crime and revealed that Police Constable Hanwate who was accompanying him while they were getting out of Shivaji Nagar Police Station gave call to the complainant for joining them for a cup of tea and about that time the complainant made utterances "Kya Dekh Ra Be Aja" and physically engaged himself in a scuffle with him; and as a result of which, the complainant fell down and received injuries. He denounced the alleged discovery of knife as a false one. 7. Panchas to the seizure panchanama and spot panchanama did not support the prosecution. There was no independent corroboration to the alleged discovery of the knife used in crime. Medical evidence revealed three injuries possibly caused by some hard and blunt object or due to fall on hard surface. Yet, learned Sessions Judge believed the prosecution version and recorded a finding that the accused has caused simple hurt to the complainant. 8. Learned Advocate Shri S.S. Choudhari for the appellant/accused submitted that the disclosure made by the accused in his statement under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 gave rise to a probability in the light of evidence on record that the complainant could sustain injury due to fall on the ground and not due to the assault with knife as alleged. He further pointed out from the text of the evidence of the so called eye witnesses i.e. P.W.-4 Suryakant Bamane, P.W-7 Arvind Shinde, P.W-8 Panjabrao Parghane that they had given limited version of the incident without disclosing the material facts regarding the assault allegedly made by the accused on the complainant. He further pointed out that the forensic investigation had revealed no blood on the knife/ dagger allegedly discovered by the accused. He posed a material question as to why the weapon allegedly used in the crime could be recovered after a period of five and half months from a place like sports stadium away from the Police Station, when the accused was seen holding knife in his hand in the campus of the Police Station, and was shortly apprehended by the police thereafter. He further pointed out from the medical evidence adduced by P.W.-6 Dr. Mangala Deshmukh that the injuries noticed by her on the person of the complainant could have been caused either by hard and blunt object or by fall on hard surface, and certainly, not by dagger/knife, a sharp cutting weapon. 9. Learned Shri K.J. Ghute Patil, Additional Public Prosecutor persuaded this Court to believe the complainant on the back ground of the corroborating versions of the natural witnesses namely the police men present at the Police Station. These rival submissions called for anxious consideration of evidence on record. 10. On the background of the defence i.e. disclosed in the statement of the accused under Section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, the controversy is narrowed down to the fact of assault made on the complainant. PW-1 Tanaji Phate deposed that when he was standing in front of Shivaji Nagar Police Station at about 12.30 pm on 5/7/2000 along with P.H.C. Kapure, Police Constable (P.C.) Hanwate gave a call to him for a cup of tea. He further deposed that he saw accused and P.C. Vaidya accompanying P.C. Hanwate. He added that he refused to join them saying that he had already taken cup of tea; and all of a sudden the accused expressed his anger with utterances "Knyou Re Kya Bola" and rushed towards him. He deposed that the accused thereafter, took out dagger, pounced on him and gave blows with dagger firstly on his head. He added that he refused to join them saying that he had already taken cup of tea; and all of a sudden the accused expressed his anger with utterances "Knyou Re Kya Bola" and rushed towards him. He deposed that the accused thereafter, took out dagger, pounced on him and gave blows with dagger firstly on his head. Complainant described that he tried to avoid blow on his head, yet he received a side blow, and thereafter, complainant tried to save himself from another blow which was aimed at his head and eventually complainant got injury on his hand. He further deposed that P.S.I. Parghane & P.S.I. Shinde intervened, over powered the accused and took him away. Later on, he added, he was hospitalized on account of bleeding injuries. PW-1 also identified shirt and Baniyan (article 1 & 2) as a clothes which were on his person at the material time. 11. Chemical Analyser’s reports dated 19/10/2000 Exhibits 34 & 35 do suggest that the clothes articles 1 & 2 were stained with blood of the victim. Medical evidence adduced by PW-6-Dr. Mangala Deshmukh further reveals that the complainant did receive bleeding injuries. According to PW-6 Dr. Mangala Deshmukh, she had examined injured PW-1 Tanaji Phate at about 2.15 pm on 5/7/2000 at Shri Guru Govind Singhji Medical Hospital, Nanded and had noticed the following injuries:- "[i] A contused lacerated wound on right forearm. 3 Cm. X 0.2 Cm x 0.5 CM away from right wrist joint [ii] a contused lacerated wound on scalp of right side, 2 CM x 0.5 CM x 0.5 CM : and [iii] Abrasion of 1 CM on breech of nose." She opined that the injuries were fresh and were caused by some hard and blunt object within 24 hours. Her cross-examination only brings out a possibility that such injuries could have been caused by fall on rough surface like stone surface. Pertinently a knife weapon allegedly used in crime was not shown to the P.W.6 Dr. Mangala Deshmukh. Medical witness thus probabilize the defence that the injuries could have been sustained by the complainant due to fall on the ground. 12. Surprisingly, the weapon of assault though, it was allegedly in the hands of the accused at the time of his apprehension, was not seized. Mangala Deshmukh. Medical witness thus probabilize the defence that the injuries could have been sustained by the complainant due to fall on the ground. 12. Surprisingly, the weapon of assault though, it was allegedly in the hands of the accused at the time of his apprehension, was not seized. One, therefore, wonders how such knife could be discovered some five and half months later from a place like a stair-case in a public sports stadium. Learned Sessions Judge, therefore, rightly disbelieved the alleged discovery of knife. These, revelations put a question mark on worth of the complainant's version. Significantly, the prosecution did not examine P.C. Hanwate, P.C. Vaidya, P.C. Kapure and or any of the members of the public then at the Police Station. P.W-4 Suryakant Bamane-A.P.I. at Shivaji Nager Police Station deposed that on hearing commotion outside the Police Station, he came out the Police Station and saw the accused having dagger in his hand in the presence of P.S.I. Shinde, P.S.I., Parghane, constables Vaidya, Kadam and others and the complainant had received bleeding injury on his head and forearm. P.W.-7 Arvind Shinde and PW-8 Panjabrao Pargane also gave similar version of the incident. None of these witnesses disclosed as to how the incident had occurred. Testimony of the complainant, as regards the material evidence of the fact that the accused pounced on him with a knife in hand, remains a lone cry, making it difficult to believe that incident did occur in the manner narrated by him. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the appellant/accused deserves to be given the benefit of reasonable doubt. Hence, the order. ORDER [i] Criminal Appeal No. 401/2003 is allowed. [ii] Conviction of the appellant/accused under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and consequent sentence to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- (Rs. One thousand only) and in default to suffer simple imprisonment of one month passed by learned Sessions Judge, Nanded, in Sessions Case No. 52/2001, is set aside. Fine amount deposited, if any, be refunded to the appellant/accused. Appeal allowed.