The central legal point established in the judgment is that the presence of enmity between the parties, coupled with contradictions and infirmities in the evidence, can lead to the prosecution's case being highly doubtful and entitle the accused to the benefit of doubt.

Chandra Mohan Prasad, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 9.4.1992 passed by the 1st Additional Session Judge, Saran at Chapra in Session Trial No. 292 of 1985 whereby each of the three appellants has been convicted under Sec. 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo RI for one year.

2. The fardbeyon of the informant Baljeet Paswan (PW 3) was recorded by Sub-Inspector R.S. Choudhary on 2.8.1982 at 6.30 a.m. at State Dispensary, Mashrakh where he (informant) was admitted for treatment. The informant alleged that on 1.8.1982 at about 5-6 p.m. he was returning from Rajauli Market to the house of his Malik Bishram Singh where he was engaged as labourer and when he reached on tri-junction in village Barba Tola the three appellants out of whom the appellant Ramchandra carried a chura and rest two carrying farsa were standing there. Appellant Kailash Gupta stated that he (informant) was not compromising the case and he ordered to assault whereupon Kailash Pd assaulted with farsa on his head, Sudama Singh also assaulted with farsa and when he (informant) received injury on the palm of his right hand then appellant Ramchandra Prasad Gupta assaulted him with chhura (dagger) causing injury on his neck. The informant cried whereupon witnesses Shri Gani Mian, Surendra Singh, Suryadeo Singh, Krishna Bahadur Singh, and Harnarayan Singh are said to have arrived there and witnessed the occurrence. Out of the six witnesses only Surendra Singh has been examined as PW 1. On the basis of the fardbeyan information report was lodged and the case was investigated and thereafter charge-sheet under Sec. 307, IPC was submitted and the appellants were put on trial and they have been convicted and sentenced as stated above.

3. As many as five witnesses were examined by the prosecution. PW 3 Baljeet Paswan is the informant him-self. PW 1 Surendra Singh and PW 2 Ramjanam Singh have been examined as witnesses to the occurrence. PW 4 Dr. Mahadeo Prasad is the doctor who examined the injured informant (PW 3). PW 4 Ramsewak Choudhary is the investigating officer of this case. The informant (PW 3) deposed that while he was returning from Rajauli Mandir Barba Tola and reached near trijunction in village Rajauli the three appellants who were standing with farsa and chhura stopped him and Kailash asked him to compromise the case and that when he refused Kailash assaulted with farsa on his head causing bleeding injury. Sudama Singh tried to assault on his neck but when he tried to ward off the blow he received cut injury near left thumb and that appellant Ramchandra Pd. assaulted him with chhura on his neck, he further deposed that he cried whereupon witnesses arrived there. Out of these witnesses only Surendra Singh has been examined as PW 1. He deposed that he was brought on a cot to hospital. In his cross-examination at para 8 he deposed that he had worked under appellant Kailash Prasad Gupta for eleven months and thereafter he was working as a labourer under Bishram Singh. At para ten he deposed that appellant Kailash Pd. Gupta is a Mukhiya. He further deposed that he was returning from the market after purchasing articles. At para 12 he deposed that when Kailash assaulted him he was in standing position and then when Sudama Singh assaulted him he fell down and that after his falling down the appellants had assaulted on his back. He also stated in para 14 that none of the witnesses had tried to intervene and to save him from the assailants.

4. The PW 1 deposed about the occurrence on similar line. At para 5 of #28; cross-examination#29; he deposed that appellant Kailash Pd Gupta is Mukhiya of Rasauli Grampanchayat and appellant Ramchandra Pd Gupta is a Government servant. He deposed that his uncle Chandrama Singh is Sarpanch of Rasauli Gram Panchayat. At para 11 he deposed that Rasauli Bazar situates at a distance of half mile towards south of the PO. At para 12 he deposed that during the occurrence the informant had not