IMPORTANT POINT
When there is a contradiction regarding weapon used by accused persons as per F.I.R. and the medical report and deposition of witnesses in the Court, the prosecution story becomes doubtful.

ORDER

M.W. Deo, J.- Appellants stand convicted for offences punishable under Section 325 read with Section 149 IPC with a sentence of R.I. for 2 years and a fine of Rs. 500; Section 147 IPC with a sentence of R.I. for 6 months and under Section 323 read with Section 149 IPC with a sentence of R.I. for 6 months. All jail sentences to run concurrently.

2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case was that admittedly the relations between the accused persons belonging to one party and the injured belonging to the rival party were strained over Panchayat elections. It was said that one Gopal Singh (PW -8) was assaulted by Bhura Khan who is one of the appellants. The rival faction, therefore, made an issue of it and went to Police Station Mandsaur to lodge report. While the party was returning to their village after lodging report on 22.9.1983 it was at about 8 O' Clock in the night near village Bugalia, that the appellants armed with deadly weapons like a gun, dhariya, sword and lathis assaulted the complainant party led by Ramlal (PW- l). A report was lodged in Police Station Mandsaur Dehat at a distance of 8 Kms. at 9.30 PM. During investigation Gautam, Balbahadur Singh, Ramlal and Lalu were found to have suffered injuries in the nature of contusions and lacerations caused by hard and blunt object. Some of them had resulted in fractures of arm and leg. After completing the investigation the accused were tried for charges under; Sections 148, 307 read with Section 149 and Section 323 read with Section 149 IPC.

3. After the trial the learned Sessions Court found that no case under Section 307 IPC was made out and acquitted accused of that charge read with section 149 IPC; but instead found all of them guilty under Section 325 read with 149 IPC. They were also found guilty under Section 323 read with 149 IPC and one under Section 141 IPC and sentenced as stated at the out set.

4. The learned counsel for the appellants challenges the veracity of the prosecution story as a whole on the contention that here are a set of people who were undisputedly on inimical terms with the accused persons wanted to the police that all the accused persons had formed a common object of attempt to commit murder of them. The contention was highlighted from this angle that though the accused persons were said to be armed with deadly weapons like a gun, dhariya and sword yet none of the injured persons had any injury resulting from such of weapons. The contention was carried forward to say that the medical evidence really did not support the initial stand of the complainant party making the repot that the accused persons had formed a common object of committing their murder. Thus the prosecution story itself suffers a dent right from its inception bringing in elements of unreliability.

5. It was next argued that the entire episode appears to have occurred on account of an allegation that the accused Bhura Khan had assaulted Gopal singh and, therefore, the complainant party picked up the cause and had gone to the police station to lodge a report against Bhura Khan so that illegal activity of Bhura Khan should be curbed in the general interest of society and in the interest of maintaining peace. Thus evidence of Gopal Singh assumes central importance as nucleus of the case. It is, however, to find that Gopal Singh (PW- 8) did not support the prosecution and did not say that Bhura Khan had beaten him or assaulted him. He only said that he had only an altercation with Bhura Khan. The story of Gopal Singh is that though he narrated the incident to Ramlal (PW-1) the complainant, he did want to take the matter further but Ramlal (PW-1) and Balbahadur singh (PW -2) acted like busy body and took him to police station to make a report against Bhura Khan. This only showed how deeply the complainant party consisting of Ramlal and Balbahadur singh were interested in machanisation against Bhura Khan. Gopal Singh did not support Ramlal and Balbahadur Singh on the material f