CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 62 OF 1994 ******** Against the judgment dated 28.2.1994 passed in Sessions Trial No. 230/1985 by the learned 7th Addl. Sessions Judge, Rohtas, Sasaram. ****** 1. AJAY KUMAR SINGH @ TUNTUN SINGH S/O BINDESHWAR SINGH 2. RAJ KAPUR SINGH S/O SRI NARWADESHHAR SINGH 3. NARWADESHWAR SINGH S/O LATE RAM BRIKSH SINGH 4. BINDESHWARI SINGH S/O LATE RAMYASH SINGH 5. JANESHWAR SINGH S/O LATE RAMYASH SINGH 6. JANESHWAR SINGH S/O LATE RAMYASH SINGH 7. RAJESHWAR SINGH S/O LATE RAMYASH SINGH ALL R/O VILLAGE SISRIT TOLA, P.S.- NOKHA, DISTRICT-ROHTAS ……..….. Appellants Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR …..………. Respondent ************ For the Appellant : Nagendra Dubey 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 appellant nos. 3 to 6 have been convicted under Section 307/149 I.P.C. whereas the appellant nos. 1 and 2 have been convicted under Section 307 I.P.C. and while the appellants nos. 3 to 6 are sentenced to 5 years rigorous imprisonment, appellant nos.1 and 2 have been sentenced to 7 years rigorous imprisonment. Further the appellant nos. 1 and 2 convicted under Section 148 I.P.C. and 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to 1 year rigorous imprisonment and 2 years rigorous imprisonment respectively. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 2.10.1982 the accused persons came upon the paddy fields of the appellants and, thereafter, the appellant nos. 1 and 2 fired at Sheo Pujan Singh and Kameshwar Singh and appellant no. 1 also fired at the informant. The rest of the accused persons are supposed to have exhorted. 3. During trial altogether 8 witnesses were examined the material, Investigating Officer was not examined. Doctor who was examined as p.w.8 found a single injury on the person of the injured which was simple in nature whereas Kameshwar Singh found simple injuries caused by fire arms on non-vital part. The informant was also found to have sustained simple injuries. 4. It has been submitted that all the prosecution witnesses examined were interested in nature and the main Investigating Officer was not examined who was essential in the facts of the case since the occurrence had taken place in the background of land dispute which was being claimed by both the parties. 5. Considering the said circumstance appearing in the case, the appeal is allowed and the order of conviction and sentence passed against the appellants by the 7th Addl. Sessions Judge, Rohtas, Sasaram in Sessions Trial No. 230/1985 by the judgment dated 28.2.1994 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.