The man had moved the sessions court against an order of a magisterial court which had accepted the closure report filed by the police and noted that the injuries on the victim, Satpal, were due to a fall after which he had suffered a heart attack and died.
The petitioner, Ashok Kumar, contended before Additional Sessions Judge Atul Kumar Garg that the magistrate while rejecting his plea against the closure report did not take into account the injuries mentioned in the post-mortem report.
The ASJ, however, noted "the whole case of revisionist (Ashok) is based on the post-mortem report where six injuries have been mentioned on the body of deceased. Except said injuries mentioned in the postmortem report, there is no evidence to connect the accused with the offences mentioned in the FIR."
The court also noted that in the initial statement given to the police, Ashok and his family members had stated they did not suspect any foul play.