vibhav

Negating the finding of the High Court as to the place of occurrence learned counsel submitted that the High Court did not
consider the case in its proper perspective. A perusal of entire evidence on record would clearly establish the place of
occurrence and that the prosecution has succeeded in proving the guilt beyond all reasonable doubt. The evidence on record
clearly reveals that the investigating officer had recovered the blood stain role of the play and the plain clay from the place of
incident which was sent for examination wherein on analysis human blood was found at the same. Even the evidence on eye
witnesses PW 1 Bhola singh and PW 2 Baijnath Singh is very much consistent on the said aspect and therefore the High Court
was wrong but raise a dispute on the place of occurrence contending further on the doubt raised by the High Court on the
genuine of the incident. Learned Counsel submitted that the High Court has laid lot of emphasis on the presence of severe
digested food in the medical report and has held that it totally contradicting the case of prosecution with record to the time of
occurrence of the offence whereas the Doctors in their examination in chief have clearly stated that the incident might have
taken place at 8 A.M. Thus the High Court erred in recording the finding contrary to evidence in trial for the reasons that any
villages generally people wakeup early in the morning and start work early after having breakfast and therefore persons half
digest food could not be probable ground to arrive at a conclusion that the deceased must have died at night. Learned Counsel
finally submitted that for all the aforesaid reasons the High Court ought not to have interfere with the while reasoned judgement
of the High Court. In support of as his submissions learned counsel placed reliance on various authorities of this court.
The learned counsel for the state supported the contentions of the appellant and conceded that the High Court erred
in acquiting the respondent accused ignoring certain relief circumstance and material evidence which clearly establish the guilt
of the accused. According to him the High Court has contrary to failed but consider the genuine facts of the FIR shall erred at
9.50 AM material after the incident without in unreliable delay evidence of both eyewitnesses i.e PW 1 and PW 2 were reliable
as their statements were completely corroborated by the medical evidence. the injured Ganga singh though could not be
examined by the prosecution but had not medically examined by the PW 6 at the same date corroborating the prosecution story
and the motive of the accused to commit the crime was established as they were having intermaked with the victim party
intervention an appellant dispute. learned counsel Therefore prayed on considering the abundant and consent evidence
available on record though should excise its powers under article 136 of the constitution of India and set aside the impugned
order and order by convicting the accused.