Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.150 OF 1994 (Appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 1/4.6.1994 passed by the 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur, in Sessions Case No. 74 of 1990/Trial No. 80 of 1990) 1. KAILASH SINGH 2. LAKHAN SINGH 3. BIJAY SINGH ALL SONS OF DIKAN SINGH ALL RESIDENTS OF AMKHORIA, P.S. SAHKUND, DISTT. BHAGALPUR. ------- APPELLANTS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR --------RESPONDENT For the Appellant : Mr. Krishna Moha, Advocate. Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, A.P.P. ------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J: Heard. Appellants have been convicted under Sections 307 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years as also under Section 27 of the Arms Act but no separate sentence has been passed in this regard by the 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur, in Sessions Case No. 74 of 1990/Trial No. 80 of 1990 by a Judgment dated 1/4.6.1994. The prosecution case is that on 12.9.1988 while the Informant’s younger brother was working in the paddy fields, the accused persons came there variously armed and fired at them on account of which the Informant’s brother Ramdeo Singh and he himself were injured. The reason for the occurrence was that 2 the Informant’s younger brother had deposed against the accused persons and, therefore, they were sought to be eliminated. The prosecution examined nine witnesses out of whom PW-1 and PW-2 were F.I.R. named eye witnesses but declared hostile by the prosecution whereas PWs-3, 4, 5 and 6 are own brothers and PW-7 is the brother-in-law. PW-8 is the Doctor who examined the two injured whereas PW-9 is the Investigating Officer. From the evidence of PW-8, the Doctor, I find that PW-5 has sustained three injuries on his person whereas injuries No. 1 and 2 were lacerated. Injury No. 3 was incised. Apparently, the injury No. 1 was caused with Fire Arm. The injuries on PW-6 (Informant) were six in number whereas some of them were caused by hard blunt substance. The rest were caused by Fire Arms. The evidence of PWs-2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are consistent of the point of assault on the injured persons and there is no reason to disbelieve the prosecution story on the manner of occurrence. Moreover, the rest of the corroborative witnesses even though the family members are consistent on the point of assault by the accused persons. However, manner of occurrence does not reveal that the intention of the Appellant was to the cause of death of the two injured and, therefore, the conviction of the Appellant under Section 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code is converted under Section 326 of the Indian Penal 3 Code. The sentence undergone by them during trial shall be sufficient conviction under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the Appellants (if alive) are directed to pay a sum of ` 1,000/- each to each of the two accused within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt notice from the Trial Court in its regard in default of which an imprisonment for the 3 months rigorous imprisonment. With this modification, the Appeal is dismissed. Patna High Court, Patna Dated, the 7th April, 2011 NAFR/S.ALI ( Anjana Prakash, J.)