Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.194 of 1997 ------- Against the judgment judgment and order of conviction dated 2nd July, 1997, passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi, in Sessions Trial No.121 of 1985/ 49 of 1988. --------- =========================================================== 1. Ramashray Raut S/o Bechan Raut, 2. Ram Ekwal Raut, son of Bechan Raut, 3. Shambhu Raut S/o Bechan Raut, & 4. Nageshwar Choudhary S/o Bashishtha Choudhary All resident of village- Sirsia, P.S. Bela, District- Sitamarhi .... .... Appellant/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance: For the Appellant/s : Mr. Virnedra Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s: Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH) 1. Appellants nos. 1, 2 and 4 have been convicted under section 324/34 Indian Penal Code and appellant no.3 has been convicted under section 323/34 Indian Penal Code by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi, in Sessions Trial No.121 of 1985/ 49 of 1988 by judgment dated 02.07.1997 and released them on probation under section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as also imposed fine of Rs.600/- as compensation to the informant and the two injured to be paid by each of the appellants. 2. The case of the prosecution according to the informant Upendra Sah is that on 07.03.1983 he asked the appellant Ramashray Raut to settle the dispute of land through Panchayati to which the appellants refused, but the same led to an altercation in course of which the accused persons variously assaulted the informant, his brothers Ramesh Chandra Prasad and Sachida Nand Prasad. 3. The appellants were initially charged under section 307/34 Indian Penal Code but acquitted of the charges and sentenced as mentioned above. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.194 of 1997 dt.08-07-2011 2 4. The prosecution examined nine witnesses, out of whom, PW 1 (Ramesh Chandra Prasad), PW 2 (Lal Babu Rai), PW 3 (Badri Rai), PW 4 (Sachida Nand Prasad) and PW 6 (Upendra Sah) are the eye witnesses to the occurrence. PW 5 (Ram Asish Das) and PW 7 (Vijay Kumar) have been tendered for cross- examination. PW 8 (Dr. Awadhesh Chandra Jha) is the doctor, who examined the three injured and PW 9 (Sukhdeo Das) is the Investigating Officer. 5. PW 8, the doctor examined PW 6 (Upendra Sah) and found three injuries on his person but all the injuries were simple in nature. The said doctor also examined PW 4 (Sachida Nand Prasad) and found two injuries on his person which were also simple. Similarly, he examined PW 1 (Ramesh Chandra Prasad) and found one injury on his person which was simple in nature. All the three injured persons had sustained injuries mainly on the non-vital parts and, admittedly, all of them were simple in nature. 6. From the manner of occurrence depicted by the prosecution, it is difficult to disbelieve the witnesses even in the light of the two defence witnesses, who have been examined on behalf of the defence for creating a doubt about the veracity of the prosecution case. 7. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. 8. However, since the occurrence had taken place in the year 1983 i.e. more than 28 years ago, I am of the view that they should be exonerated from the liability of fine. In view of such, the sentence is modified to the extent that that no fine is to be paid by the appellants. (Anjana Prakash,J.) Patna High Court Patna Dated the 8th July, 2011 NAFR/ JA/-