Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.302 OF 1994 [Appeal against the judgment and order dated 13.7.1994 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamui in Sessions Trial No.144 of 1990] MUNNA RAWAT, SON OF BANARASI RAWAT, RESIDENT OF MAHARAJGANJ, P.S. JAMUI, DIST. JAMUI …………………….. Appellant Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ---------------------- Respondent For the Appellant : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Senior Advocate Mr. D.N. Tiwari, Advocate Mr. Anujit Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent : Mrs. Madhuri Lata, Addl. P.P. --------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J: The appellant has been convicted u/s. 307 I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for seven years by a judgment 13.7.1994 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamui in Sessions Trial No.144 of 1990. The prosecution case is that on 3.8.1987 at about 11.15 A.M. when the informant Anil Kumar Keshri was going to the Bank, suddenly the accused persons surrounded him and allegedly the appellant gave dagger blow on the informant. On his cries, P.W.1 and P.W.3 came to the place of occurrence, to whom the informant gave a hearsay account. After close of investigation four persons were put on trial, but the Trial Court acquitted the rest three and convicted the appellant as mentioned above. - 2 - During trial, the prosecution has examined in all seven witnesses. Out of whom, P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.3 have been declared hostile, whereas P.W.4 is a hearsay witness and P.W.5 is the informant himself and P.W.6 is the doctor, whereas the P.W.7 is the Advocate’s Clerk, who proved the case diary and such police documents. The defence of the appellant was that there was long outstanding strained relationship between the appellant and the informant and he has been implicated on account of such enmity. The appellant also brought on record the judgment of the earlier case, which was pending between the parties vide Exhibit A. Admittedly the entire case rests on the evidence of P.W.5, the sole witness, with whom the appellant had long outstanding enmity. It also appears that even though there was an allegation that all the accused persons had assaulted the informant, but the major portion of the prosecution case was disbelieved by the Trial Court and rest of the three accused persons were acquitted of the charges. The doctor had found two injuries on the person of the informant, but the depth of injury on the chest was not measured and, therefore, it is difficult to conclude that even though the injury was found on the vital part, it was inflicted with the intention to cause death. Under the circumstances, the conviction of the appellant is converted to one u/s.323 I.P.C. and he is sentence to a period already undergone. However, the appellant (if alive) shall be - 3 - required to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- as compensation to the victim/family within eight weeks of receipt of such a notice from the Trial Court and in absence of which he shall be sentenced to a period of six months R.I. With these modifications, the appeal is dismissed. Patna High Court Dated, 4th April, 2011. NAFR/ Narendra/ ( Anjana Prakash, J. )