“In the spot panchanama at Exh.30 names of witnesses Dipendra Shukla and Pradeep Rawat are mentioned. I have not enquired with Shri Lokare as to whether he recorded statements of both these witnesses and I have also not recorded statement of Shri Lokare to that respect. Prior to 03.10.2013 said witnesses never stated that they had seen the deceased girl with the accused. It is true to say that said both the witnesses are residing in the transit camp. I have not prepared the panchanama of female dog and also not included her photograph in the documents. In the complaint at Exh. 20 no name of accused is mentioned. All the incidence spots are situated in the open space and anybody can access there. There is a road connected to Unnati Society and peoples used that road. It is not true to say that there is no documentary evidence produced on record regarding the said chawl where accused was residing. Accused is residing in the present chawl, showing the said fact there is no documentary evidence on record. But it has come in the statements of witnesses. Complainant has not stated that whether any witness had seen the deceased girl with the accused. But he has stated it in supplementary statement. In the present matter T.I. Parade was not conducted. It is true to say that during the investigation some witnesses were knowing to the accused and some witnesses were not knowing to him. When I have arrested the accused I have not examined his private part. It is not true to say that at the time of arrest there was no abrasion on the foreskin of accused. It is not true to say that to involve the accused in the present matter we made abrasion on his private part. It is mandatory that after the arrest of accused within 24 hours he has to forward for his medical examination. It is not true to say that I 58 Criminal Appeal No(s). 1954-1955 of 2022