JUDGMENT : Ram Krishna Gautam, J. Order on Application to Grant Leave for Filing Criminal Appeal. 2. This Criminal Appeal, under Section 378 (4) of Criminal Procedure Code, read with Section 372 of Cr.P.C., alongwith Application to Grant Leave for Filing appeal, has been filed by Ashok Kumar Pandey against State of U.P. and six others, challenging the judgment of acquittal, passed by the Additional Sessions judge, Court No.14, Varanasi, in Sessions Trial No. 363 of 2017, Ashok Kumar Pandey vs. Shitla Prasad Pandey and 5 others, under Section 147, 148, 323/149, 325/149, 504, and 506(2) of Indian Penal Code (in short IPC), Police Station-Rohaniya, District Varanasi. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the trial court passed the impugned judgment of acquittal, on the basis of incorrect appreciation of facts and evidence placed on record. Testimony of informant PW-1 was fully intact and supported with medical evidence in which medico legal report as well as X-ray report was in full tune with injury of fracture over phalanges, reported, proved by the medical evidence, which stood corroborated by two independent witness, who have proved case of prosecution, but trial court passed judgment of conviction in cross case in which present applicant side has been convicted; against which Criminal Appeal, being Criminal Appeal No.4930 of 2019, Ashok Kumar Pandey vs. State of U.P., has been admitted and record of the case has been summoned, vide order, dated 30.07.2019, wherein judgment of conviction, in Sessions Trial No. 392 of 2003, for offence, punishable, under Sections 307 and 452 of IPC, Case Crime No. 224 of 2002, of Police Station Rohaniya, District Varanasi, has been passed. Hence, leave to file this Criminal Appeal be granted and this Criminal Appeal be also connected with above Criminal Appeal for its disposal. 4. From very perusal of the impugned judgment and contentions made in this Application as well as affidavit, filed in support of the Application, it is apparent that the pendency of the cross case for occurrence of same date, time and place, in between the same parties, was undisputed fact and both of the Sessions Trial were held as cross cases in which one case ended in conviction wherein present applicant and others were held aggressor and convicted against which Criminal Appeal was admitted and is pending. In this case, judgment of acquittal is there. 5. In this case, judgment of acquittal is there. 5. Occurrence, injuries of complainant side, cause of those injuries, were given by accused persons in their statement recorded, under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and it was the same contention, which was a case of prosecution in cross-case. Meaning thereby, injury over the person of Ashok Kumar Pandey was not disputed, but it was said to be caused by exercise of right of private defence by accused persons, when this assault was made by Ashok Kumar Pandey and his family members, at the time of dispute, which occurred, while depositing sand over the pathway, which was protested by Shitla Prasad Pandey and his family members, but was resisted by Ashok Kumar Pandey and his family members, which resulted in this occurrence, in which a fire arm shot, with intention to kill, was extended, and a case crime number, for offence of attempt to culpable homicide, amounting to murder, punishable under Section 307, coupled with Section 452 of IPC was got registered against Ashok Kumar Pandey and his family members. Those case crime numbers were investigated, which resulted in submission of chargesheet, over which cognizance was taken and cross-cases were held in trial. 6. In cross-case, there occurred conviction against which Criminal Appeal, as above, has been instituted and is pending. Therein, Ashok Kumar Pandey side was held aggressor, who had committed above offences and Shitla Prasad Pandey side was held to be victim of that aggression. 7. One very important fact, which needs to be mentioned, is the testimony of Medical Officer of Jail where Ashok Kumar Pandey was admitted. Wherein this has specifically been mentioned that there was no fracture over the body part, which was put under plaster by the Medical officer of Government Hospital at Varanasi. This was suspected by the Medical officer and, ultimately, he made a report and got the same examined by a team of specialist and it was found that it was a false injury, i.e., Ashok Kumar Pandey, who got this criminal case initiated, by way of an application moved, under Section 156 (3) of Cr.P.C., which, subsequently, stood converted to be a complaint case, was with no injury of fracture over his person at the place, which was put under plaster and it was found by the team of Specialists that there was no such injury and it was proved on record. This was a fact of present case and under all above perspective of law and fact as well as evidences, proved before trial court, this judgment of acquittal was passed. There was a judgment of conviction against Ashok Kumar Pandey and his allies. 8. There is no perversity or illegality in passing of the present impugned judgment. Moreso, this conduct of Ashok Kumar Pandey regarding having an X-ray and plaster, without there being any fracture over his person, reveals the way in which this case was concocted. Hence, there remains no ground for grant of leave to file proposed Criminal Appeal against the judgment impugned. 9. In view of what has been discussed above, Application for Grant of Leave to File Criminal Appeal lacks merit and, therefore, stands rejected accordingly.