Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.221 of 1999 === Against the judgment and order of conviction dated 7th August, 1999 passed in Sessions Trial No. 29/94 by Sri Upendra Narayan Yadav, Additional Sessions Judge-X, Patna **** 1. Shyam Bihari Yadav 2. Ram Ishwar Yadav 3. Ram Laddu Yadav 4. Tipan Yadav 5. Bal Krishna Yadav 6. Ganauri Yadav 7. Lal Kishun Yadav 8. Chutkul Yadav alias Chutkula Yadav .... .... Appellants Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent === Appearance: For the Appellants: Mr. Ajay Mishra, Amicus Curiae For the Respondent: Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, A.P.P. === PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE MANDHATA SINGH J U D G E M E N T Mandhata Singh, J., Statement (Fardbeyan) of one Ashok Kumar Singh has been made basis for the F.I.R. which in short is that on 7.6.1993 at about 6.30 AM he was lying on a cot near his boring house situated at village Faridpur. In the meantime, accused persons namely Ganauri Yadav, Bal Kishun Yadav, Lal Kishun Yadav, Chutkul Yadav, Tipan Yadav along with 8-10 unknown persons of village Baghar came there, started to enter the boring house of informant and when he asked as to where they were going, one of the accused persons ordered to assault, thereupon all the accused persons assaulted the informant by means of Lathi brutally with intention to kill. Informant fell down on the ground and again he was assaulted by the above accused persons, on alarm witnesses Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.221 of 1999 dt.25-01-2012 2 namely Rajendra singh, Bhushan Singh and Sudarsan Singh of village Raghopur, Chotan Singh and Jairam Singh of village Govindpur came there and saved the informant. 2. Cause of occurrence is said earlier occurrence of assault between the villagers of Baghar and villagers of informant’s village for which a case was lodged. 3. All the accused persons faced trial for the offence under [STATUTE] which ended in conviction to Ganauri Yadav under [STATUTE] and rest under [STATUTE] . 4. In all 11 witnesses are examined in the case. They are P.W.1 Rajendra singh, P.W.2 Bhushan Singh, P.W.3 Sudarsan Singh, P.W.4 Syaram Singh, P.W.5 Chhotan Singh, P.W.6 Jairam Singh, P.W.7 Rakshapal Singh, P.W.8 Ashok Kumar informant of the case, P.W.9 Ashok Kumar Singh son of Ram Ekbal, P.W.10 Dr Birendra Kumar Singh and P.W.11 Dr Dhirendra Narayan Singh. Of witnesses, P.Ws 5 and 7 are tendered witnesses to state nothing on the point of taking place of the incident. Rest are stating about taking place of the incident specifying coming of accused along with others and their assault to the informant. In the F.I.R. though there is no mention about causing of assault by means of Khanti but that is alleged (stated) by all the material witnesses which was in conformity with their statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. Informant even in his statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. when again examined Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.221 of 1999 dt.25-01-2012 3 after recording of Fardbeyan states about assault by accused Ganauri Yadav by means of Khanti. 5. Finding no relief on the point of conviction, sentence is challenged rather a prayer is made to take sympathetic and lenient view on the point of sentence more specifically it is submitted on behalf of learned Amicus Curiae that enmity was there in between the parties for an earlier incident and the case was pending in between the parties and the allegation of assault is vague only. 6. It is further submitted that all the accused appellants are first offender having no criminal antecedent at all and if that is tagged with enmity between the parties, appellants are entitled for relief enumerated under Probation of Offenders Act. Appellant Ganauri Yadav is convicted for the offence under [STATUTE] punishable with three years rigorous imprisonment and has been convicted also for the same. 7. Incident is of the year 1993, all the accused persons faced trial till the year 1999 and the appeal also remained pending till today. So, in discussed suggested circumstance I am also of the view that accused appellants are entitled for the relief enumerated under [STATUTE] . 8. On the observations made above in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal is dismissed with modification on the point of sentence and conviction to the appellants for the respective offences is affirmed. On the point of sentence appellants Shyam Behari Yadav, Ram Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.221 of 1999 dt.25-01-2012 4 Ishwar Yadav, Ram Laddu Yadav, Tipan Yadav, Bal Kishun Yadav, Lal Kishun Yadav and Chutkul Yadav @ Chutkula Yadav are released after due admonition and accused appellant Ganauri Yadav is released on his entering into a probation bond for a period of six months undertaking to keep peace and be of good behaviour during such period. A period of two months is allowed for execution of such bond. 9. As the appellants are on bail, they shall stand discharged from liabilities of their respective bail bonds save and except appellant no.4 who shall be so discharged from liability of his bail bond only on furnishing of his probation bond. 10. Copy of the judgment along with lower court records be sent back to the trial court forthwith. 11. Let a copy of first page and last page of this judgment be handed over to learned Amicus Curiae for needful. (Mandhata Singh,J.) PATNA HIGH COURT Dated 25.01.2012 AI/NAFR

Applicable IPC Section: 307

Statute Text:
Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Attempt to murder. Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to imprisonment for life, or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned. Attempts by Life Convicts: When any person offending under this section is under sentence of imprisonment for life, he may, if hurt is caused, be punished with death.