P.W. 3 tried to protest when appellant no. 1 and others assaulted him with sword and lathi.Thereupon, the appellants also assaulted Parboti Debi with sword 3 and lathi.Asoke Kahar (P.W.1) is the son of Jagannath Kahar and is the defacto complainant in this case.He intervened in the skirmish and was also assaulted by the lathi.P.Ws. 2 and 3 sustained bleeding injuries and were admitted in hospital.P.W. 1 was also struck 4 on his right shoulder with lathi and he also fell down.He lodged first information report which was exhibited and he proved his signature thereon.The police came to the place of occurrence and seized blood stained clothes of the victim and P.W. 1 signed on the seizure list.He identified the wearing apparels of his father and sister.In cross-examination P.W. 1 stated that his father was struck by the backside of the sword.She corroborated the evidence of P.W. 1 and stated that when she requested the appellants not to assault P.W. 3, they assaulted her causing bleeding injuries.In cross-examination she stated that she was in hospital for 11 days.P.W. 3 is the father of P.W. 1 and 2 and is the other injured victim who corroborated their evidence.He stated that appellant no. 1 assaulted him on the head with a sword.He further stated that P.W. 2 was also assaulted by the miscreants.He lost his consciousness and was admitted in hospital.P. W. 4 is a neighbour, who stated that he came to the place of occurrence after the incident.He made arrangements to take P.W. 2 to the hospital.04.1985 around 9-30 p.m. the appellants along with other miscreants came to the house of Jagannath Kahar (P.W.3) at Mominpara, Block No. 9 and House No. 18 under P.S. Jagatdal, being armed with deadly weapons like lathi, nepala, sword etc. forming an unlawful assembly with the object of causing rioting.Appellant no. 1 asked P.W. 3 why they had not been invited the 'annaprasan ceremony' of his grandson.Thereafter, the appellants threatened P.W. 3 to kill him.The case being a sessions triable one was committed to the Court of Sessions and transferred to the Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Alipore for trial and disposal.Charges were framed under Section 148 /307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.The appellants claimed to be not guilty and claimed to be tried.The prosecution has examined 12 witnesses.The defence of the appellants were one of innocence and false implication.In conclusion of trial, the trial court by judgment and order dated 29th July, 1987 convicted and sentence the appellants as aforesaid.Hence, the present appeal.P.W. 1, 2 and 3 are the injured witnesses in the instant case.He stated that on the fateful day when he was taking his food along with his father and sister in their house the appellants came to their residence and abused their father as to whey they were not invited on the 'annaprasan ceremony' of his son which was being celebrated on that day.Thereafter the accused persons assaulted P.W. 3 with sword.He fell down and sustained bleeding injuries.When P.W. 2 tried to intervene she was also assaulted with sword and lathi.She suffered bleeding injuries as also a fracture on her hand.He signed on the seizure list.He corroborated the evidence of the other prosecution witnesses and deposed about the assault on P. Ws. 2 and 3 by appellant no. 1 and his nephew.In cross-examination, P.W. 6 stated that he saw the incident while fetching water.P. W. 7 is an ASI of Police, who received the FIR.He proved the written complaint as well as the formal FIR.P. W. 8 and 9 are the medical witnesses in the instant case.P. W. 8 stated that he had examined Jagannath Kahar (P.W. 3) and found the following injuries :-1. Lacerated injury over the left side of the scalp 3" x 3 " x ".2. Lacerated injury over the left forearm 1 " x " x " plus 1" x " x ".3. Lacerated injury over the right forearm 1 " x " x ".He further deposed that the victim was conscious when he examined him.He stated that he was assaulted by Kana Pandit, Kamala Mondal, Bimala Mondal, Jalal Mondal, Rajballav Singh and nephew of Kana Pandit on 1.4.85 at about 9.30 P.M. with bamboo, heavy sharp instrument (nepala).He also examined Parbati Debi (P.W. 3) and found the following injuries :1. Lacerated injury over the scalp 1 " x " x 1".Swelling and tenderness on left forearm.In cross-examination, he stated that lacerated injury can also be caused by sword.P. W. 9 stated that one Jagannath Singh was admitted multiple lacerated injuries over the scalp and both forearms.On x-ray of the scapula, it was found that there was a doubtful crack fracture of the neck of left scapula.He also stated that the x-ray of Parboti Debi, (P.W. 2) showed fracture of left radius.P. W. 11 is a neighbour, who was, however, declared hostile.P. W. 12 is the Investigating Officer of the case, who submitted the charge sheet.It is the evidence of P.W. 1 that the blunt side of the sword was used.He further submitted that independent witness, P. W. 11 has not supported the prosecution case.He, accordingly, prayed that the conviction to be set aside.Mr. Ghosh, learned Counsel appearing for the State submitted that the evidence of injured witnesses were consistent and is supported by medical evidence.Under such circumstances, no corroboration is necessary to bring home the guilt of the accused/appellants.He prayed for dismissal of the appeal.It is true that they are relations of the injured witnesses.Furthermore, the names of the appellants transpired as assailants at the earliest opportunity before the Medical Officer, namely, P. W. 8 as recorded in the injury report.Hence, I do not find any reason to disbelieve the injured witnesses whose ocular version is corroborated by the medical evidence merely on the ground that the same is not corroborated by independent witnesses.Corroboration by independent witness is not a rule of law but a rule of prudence and caution.If the evidence of the injured witnesses are unequivocal, consistent and is corroborated by medical evidence, there is no reason to disbelieve them merely on the ground of lack of corroboration.It is true that P. W. 6 in cross-examination claimed that he did not see anyone apart from appellant no.1 and his nephew at the place of occurrence.However, one ought not lose sight of the fact that he was not inside the house of P.W. 3 where the incident occurred but P. W. 6 had seen the incident from a distance when he was fetching water and it is possible that he was unable to notice the presence of all the assistants at the place of occurrence.Accordingly, I am of the opinion that the incident as portrayed by the prosecution has been proved beyond reasonable doubt.Hence, the intention to kill P.W. 1 is not evident in the facts of the case.Accordingly, I alter the conviction of appellant no.1 from Section 307 IPC to 326 IPC.In view of the aforesaid discussion, I maintain the conviction of the appellants under Section 148 IPC.Coming to the sentence I find that the incident had occurred four decades ago.The appellants do not have any criminal antecedent.Accordingly, I reduce the sentence imposed on the appellants for commission of offence punishable under Section 148 IPC and direct that they shall suffer imprisonment for a period already undergone and pay a fine of Rs.200/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven days more.With regard to the conviction under Section 326/34 IPC, I direct the appellant no.1, who is the principal assailant upon P.W. 3, shall suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and shall pay a fine of Rs.200/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days more and the appellant nos.2 to 4 herein shall suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months and shall pay a fine of Rs.200/- each, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven days.All the sentences shall run concurrently.Let a copy of this judgment along with LCR be sent down to the trial court at once for compliance and execution of the sentence in accordance with law.The appeal stands disposed of.Urgent Photostat Certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied expeditiously after complying with all necessary legal formalities.(Joymalya Bagchi, J.) Aloke/AB Item no. 417

Cited provisions: Section 148 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 307 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code; Section 326 in The Indian Penal Code