Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.117 OF 1996 (Appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 31.5.1996 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Ara, in Sessions Trial No. 355 of 1985) ******* 1. RAM KISHUN TURHA, SON OF BHOLA TURHA 2. SHRI BHAGWAN TURHA 3. BHUTANI TURHA BOTH SONS OF RAM KISHUN TURHA. 4. JODHA TURHA @ AYODHYA TURHA 5. JADU TURHA 6. KHARKAT TURHA @ KARKAT TURHA ALL SONS OF BAIJ NATH TURHA ALL RESIENTS OF VILLAGE GARAHNI, P.S. CHARPOKHARI, DISTT. BHOJPUR AT ARRAH. ------ APPELLANT Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ---------RESPONDENT ****** For the Appellant : Mr. Ram Chandra Singh, Advocate. For the State : Miss. Gulnar Begum, A.P.P. ****** P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J: The Appellants have been convicted under Section 307/34 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50/- each to be paid to the Informant and a further sentence of one year under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code by a Judgment dated 31.5.1996 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Ara, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 355 of 1985. 2. The case of the prosecution according to the Informant PW-4 Devnandan Turha was that when he along with his sons PW-1 and PW-2 was returning from the house of his brother, the accused persons variously armed surrounded them and also 2 assaulted them on account of a fishing dispute for which earlier a case had been instituted. 3. During trial, the prosecution examined seven witnesses out of whom PW-1 and PW-2 are the sons of Informant PW-4 and they are eye witnesses. PW-3 is a witness who went at place of occurrence and saw the accused persons fleeing away from there as also the three injured. PW-7 is the Investigating Officer whereas PW-6 is the Doctor who examined the three injured. 4. The defence on its behalf examined one witness on the point that there was a counter version of the occurrence in which the son of the Appellant No. 4 along with others had been seriously injured. 5. On going through the evidence of the three eye witnesses, I find that there is complete denial of any counter version. Moreover, from the evidence of PW-6 I find that the Informant had sustained one grievous injury on his ulna which was fractured. However, from the manner of occurrence it is difficult to deduce that the assault by the accused persons was intended to cause death of the three injured. In the result, all the Appellants are acquitted of the charge under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. However, since there is specific allegation against the Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 of having caused the grievous injury of the Informant, they are convicted under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to the period already undergone by them during trial. The conviction of the Appellant under Section 148 of 3 the Indian Penal Code is maintained but the sentence is modified to the period already undergone by them during trial. 6. In the result, the appeal is dismissed with aforesaid modifications. (Anjana Prakash, J.) Patna High Court,Patna Dated, the 24th June, 2011. NAFR/S.ALI.