Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.107 OF 1994 (In the matter of a petition of Appeal under Section 374 sub Section (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure) 1. KAMTA MANJHI, SON OF SAKHI MANJHI 2. BHAGAT MANJHI, SON OF BENI MANJHI 3. GANESH MANJHI, SON OF BHAGAT MANJHI 4. BAHARAN SAH, SON OF THAKUR SAH 5. SHEO MANJHI @ SHEOJI MANJHI, SON OF BIJU MANJHI 6. MUSAFIR MANJHI, SON OF JAGAT MANJHI ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MOHAMMADPUR, P.S. GARKHA, DISTT. SARAN. ------ ACCUSED – APELLANTS. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR --------RESPONDENT P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J: Heard both sides. The Appellants No. 3 and 4 have been convicted under Sections 307 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years and one year respectively whereas the rest of the Appellants have been convicted under Sections 307, 149 and Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to five year and 6 months rigorous imprisonment respectively by the 1st Additional District & Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra in Sessions Trial No. 342 of 1985/73 of 1987 by Judgement dated 5.4.1994. The prosecution case is that on 22.2.1985 in the afternoon, a quarrel took place between younger brother of the Informant and the son of one of the Appellants and when the Informant went to protest about the same, he and others were 2 assaulted with the dagger and brick bats. The defence case is that on the same date of occurrence when the Informant was abusing the sister-in-law of Ramesh Manjhi, son of the accused Bhagat Manjhi which was protested a free fight took place in which transaction both sides sustained injuries for which a substantive case was also filed. On going through the evidence on record, of the seven prosecution witnesses, I find that none of the material prosecution witnesses has offered any explanation as to how the accused persons sustained injuries and, therefore, it is difficult to conclude that the prosecution case is true in its entirety. Moreover, because all the witnesses are interested in nature. In view of settled law in this regard, I am inclined to allow the appeal and acquit the Appellants of all the charges as also release them from the liabilities of their bail bonds. In the result, the Appeal is allowed and the order of conviction and Sentence passed against the Appellants in Sessions Trial No. 342 of 1985/73 of 1987 by the 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra, is set aside. Patna High Court, Patna Dated the 28th March, 2011 NAFR/S.ALI ( Anjana Prakash, J.)