Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.248 OF 1994 (Appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 29.7.1994 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, in Sessions Trial No. 416 of 1989) 1. RAMAYAN SINGH, SON OF BADRI SINGH 2. RAM PRATAP SINGH, SON OF BADRI SINGH 3. ANISH KUMAR SINGH, SON OF RAM PRATAP SINGH 4. SHAILENDRA SINGH, SON OF BHOLA SINGH 5. RAJENDRA SINGH, SON OF AWADH BIHARI SINGH 6. ASHOK KUMAR SINGH, SON OF RAMAYAN SINGH 7. SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH, SON OF RAMAYAN SINGH 8. BADRI SINGH, SON OF LATE RAM NIHORA SINGH 9. GAYTRI SINGH, SON OF HARI NARAYAN SINGH SINGH 10. SURYA NATH SINGH, SON OF LATE LALAN SINGH 11. MAHENDRA SINGH, SON OF AWADH BIHARI SINGH 12. BRAHMESHWAR SINGH, SON OF BINDESHWARI SINGH ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE PURUSHOTTAMPUR, P.S. ITARHI, DISTT. BUXAR. ------- APPELLANTS Versus STATE OF BIHAR---------------------------------------------RESPONDENT For the Appellants : Mr. Shankar Kumar Choudhary, Adv. For the State : Indu Bala Pandey, A.P.P. P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J: Heard. The Appellant Nos. 1 and 2 have been convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years. The rest of the Appellants have been convicted under Section 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four years whereas the Appellants No. 3 and 4 have been convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years by a 2 judgment dated 29.7.1994 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, in Sessions Trial No. 416 of 1989. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.1.1988 the accused persons variously armed came to the house of the Informant and an altercation arose between them over withdrawing of an earlier case between them in course of which the accused persons variously assaulted the parties and clashed them with each other. The prosecution in all examined eight witnesses out of whom PW-1 and 2 have been declared hostile whereas PWs 3, 4, 5 and 7 have been tendered for cross-examination. PW-6 is the Informant and PW-8 is the Investigating Officer. PW-6 who is the Informant of the case has conceded that there was a counter version of the occurrence and denied to have made any incriminating statement against the accused persons. In view of such, the prosecution has misarably failed to prove his case beyond all reasonable doubts. In the result, the Appeal is allowed. The order of conviction and sentence passed against the Appellants in Sessions Trial No. 416 of 1989 by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Buxar, is hereby set aside. The Appellants are discharged from the liability of their bail bonds. Patna High Court, Patna Dated, the 21st April, 2011 NAFR/S.ALI ( Anjana Prakash, J.)