CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 77 OF 1994 ******** Against the judgment and order of conviction dated 8.3.1994 passed in Sessions Trial No. 66/1980 by the learned 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Saran, Chapra. ****** 1. BISHUNI MAHTO @ BISHWANATH MAHTO S/O LATE SRI DEODHARY MAHTO 2. JAGDISH MAHTO S/O LATE DEOLAL MAHTO 3. BHULAI MAHTO @ BISHWANATH MAHTO S/O LATE SATYADEO MAHTO 4. JITAN MAHTO S/O SRI SHAMLAL MAHTO 5. RAM KISHUN MAHTO S/O LATE RAMCHELA MAHTO 6. PASHUPATI MAHTO S/O LATE JANGHI MAHTO ALL R/O VILLAGE MIRZAPUR- TALPURAINA, P.O. MIRZAPUR, P.S. MARHAURA, DISTRICT SARAN (CHAPRA) ……..….. Appellants Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR …..………. Respondent ************ For the Appellant : Ratan Prasad Sinha Adv. For the State : Indu Bala Pandey APP. P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ********* Anjana Prakash, J. The appellants have been convicted under Section 307, 148 and 452 I.P.C. and sentenced to 4 years, 6 months and 1 years rigorous imprisonment respectively, whereas the rest of the appellants have been convicted under Section 307/149 and sentenced to 2 years rigorous imprisonment as also under Section 452 and 147 and sentenced to 1 years and 6 months rigorous imprisonment respectively by the judgment dated 8.3.1994 by the 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Saran, Chapra in Sessions Trial No. 66/1980. 2. The prosecution case is that on 3.10.1974 at 8 a.m. all the accused persons variously assaulted the injured for ending a case which had cropped up between them earlier. 3. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses out of whom P.W.1, 2, 3, 4 are independent witnesses whereas P.W. 5,6,7,8 are the injured, P.W. 5 is the informant’s brother and P.W.6 is the informant’s mother whereas P.W.7 is informant himself, P.W. 8 is also brother of the informant and P.W.9 is the doctor who examined the injured and P.W.10 is the formal witness and P.W.11 is the doctor, who did x-ray of the informant’s father, mother and niece whereas the Investigating Officer has been examined as a court witness no.1. 4. It has been submitted that the parties are agnates between themselves and the occurrence did not take place in the manner as described by the prosecution. 5. On going through the evidence on record, I find that the witnesses have materially contradicted themselves and in the facts of the case no offence under Section 307 I.P.C. would be made out. Further, in view of the material contradictions, it would not be safe to upheld the conviction of the appellants. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the order of conviction and sentence passed against the appellants by the 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Saran, Chapra in Sessions Trial No. 66/1980 by the judgment dated 8.3.1994 are hereby set aside and they are acquitted of their respective charges. The appellants are discharged for the liabilities from their respective bail bonds. Patna High Court, ( Anjana Prakash, J. ) Patna Dated the 28th March, 2011 NAFR/ Fahad.