Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.312 OF 1994 [Appeal against the judgment and order dated 31.8.1994 passed by the Sessions Judge, Saran, Chapra in Sessions Trial No.24 of 1994] 1. PREMAN RAI 2. SINDHU RAI 3. SIYARAM RAI 4. KRISHNA RAI, SONS OF DEO SHARAN RAI, RESIDENTS OF VILL. NAYA PANNAPUR, TOLE NAW DIARA, P.S. AKILPUR, DIST. PATNA, AT PRESENT RESIDING AT VILLAGE CHAKIA, P.S. MAKER, DIST. SARAN, CHHAPRA (ACCUSED) …………………….. Appellants Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ………….. Respondent For the Appellants : Mr. Ram Kishore Singh, Advocate Mr. Sushil Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent : Mrs. Indubala Pandey, Addl. P.P. --------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J: The appellant nos.1 and 2 have been convicted u/s.324 I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for one year, whereas appellant nos.3 and 4 have been convicted u/s.323 I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for six months by a judgment dated 31.8.1994 passed by the Sessions Judge, Saran, Chapra in Sessions Trial No.24 of 1994. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 4.12.1993 on account of an earlier dispute between the accused they abused the informant and thereafter the appellant nos.1 and 2 armed with chhura and appellant nos.3 and 4 armed with lathies came to his door and assaulted the informant. - 2 - 3. During trial the prosecution has examined seven witnesses in all. Out of whom, P.W.5 is the informant, whereas P.W.1 is his father and P.W.2, P.W.3 and P.W.4 have deposed as eye witnesses. P.W.6 is the doctor, who had examined the injured, whereas P.W.7 is the Investigating Officer. 4. Initially the appellants were charged u/s.307/34 I.P.C. but they were acquitted of the charges since the Trial Court was of the view that the injuries have not been inflicted for causing the death of the informant and were convicted as mentioned above. 5. On going through the evidence of the eye witnesses as well as the doctor and the Investigating Officer, I find that the prosecution has been successful in proving its case beyond all reasonable doubt, even though minor discrepancies had been found by the doctor with nature of injuries. 6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed but the sentence is modified to the one that has already undergone by the appellants during trial. Patna High Court Dated, 21st June, 2011. NAFR/ Narendra/ ( Anjana Prakash, J. )