Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 253 OF 1994 In the matter of an appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. ************ 1. Chiranjib Kumar Jha alias Chiranjib Jha. 2. Sushil Kuamar Jha alias Sushil Jha. Both sons of Birendra Jha. 3. Bhup Narain Jha alias Bhupan Jha, S/o Yogendra Jha. All R/o Village-Katsary, P.S.-Sheohar, District- Sitamarhi. ……………..(Appellants) Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR------(Respondent) ************ For the Appellants : Mr. Prashant Kumar Jha, Adv. For the State : Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP. ************ P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ************* Anjana Prakash, J. The appellants No. 2 and 3 have been convicted under Section 147 IPC and order to be released on probation on execution of bail bond of Rs. 2,000/- each whereas the appellant No. 1 has been convicted under Sections 324 and 148 IPC and sentence to RI for three years and Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to RI for one year by judgment dated 30.06.1994 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi in S.Tr. No. 77 of 1986/88 of 1988. The prosecution case is that an altercation took place between the parties on account of plucking of bamboo leaves in course of which the injured was variously assaulted. Initially the appellants were charged under Section 307 IPC but the conviction was converted as mentioned aforesaid. 2 The prosecution examined eleven witnesses during trial out of which P.W. 7 has been declared hostile and the rest of the witnesses belong to the same family. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellants that admittedly occurrence took place on the spur of the moment without any pre-meditation and the injury reports are doubtful since they were neither referred by the police nor the Government Doctor. The further submission is that only interested witnesses have been examined even though the occurrence is said to have taken place in full public view. It also appears that there is a counter-version of the occurrence and the witnesses had failed to explain the injuries on the accused and it appears there was a free fight between the parties. In view of discussion made above, this appeal is allowed and the judgment dated 30.06.1994 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi in S.Tr. No. 77 of 1986/88 of 1988 is set aside. The appellants are discharged of the liability of their bail bonds. The appeal stands allowed. (Anjana Prakash, J.) Patna High Court, Patna, Dated, the 1st April, 2011. NAFR/Vikash/-