The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for substantiating the nature of injuries and the impact of non-examination of key individuals on the case.

This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31-03-2003, passed by Shri Paras Nath, Presiding Officer, Additional Court (F.T.C. No. 1) in Sessions Trial No. 132 of 1981/04 of 2001, by which the appellant Bauka Kamat was convicted under Section 148 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “the IPC”) and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years under Section 148 of the IPC and R.I. for ten years under Section 307 of the IPC. Appellants-accused Kameshwar Kamat, Shakti Kamat and Jiwachh Kamat were convicted under Section 148 and 324 of the IPC and were sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years under Section 148 of the IPC and R.I. for three years under Section 324 of the IPC. Appellants-accused Faujdar Kamat, Bhim Kamat and Jhingur Kamat were convicted under Section 147 and 323 of the IPC and were sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year under each Sections of the IPC respectively. Appellants - accused Palat Kamat, Jaleshwar Kamat and Gaunu Kamat were convicted under Section 148 and 380 of the IPC and were sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year under Section 148 of the IPC and R.I. for three years under Section 380 of the IPC. All the above sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. Earlier a report was called for from the Superintendent of Police, Madhubani with regard to death/alive status of appellants – accused Bhim Kamat, Jaleshwar Kamat and accused Jiwachh Kamat, from which it appears that appellants-accused Bhim Kamat, Jaleshwar Kamat and Jiwachh Kamat has already died during pendency of the appeal. As such this appeal with regard to appellant nos. 3, 4 and 5, namely, Bhim Kamat, Jaleshwar Kamat and Jiwachh Kamat stands abated.

3. Prosecution case as per the fardbeyan of informant Satya Narayan Jha (P.W. 3) recorded before the S.I. of Rajnagar police Station in Sadar Hospital, Madhubani on 23.09.1980, in short is that on 22.09.1980, he had gone to ease out, his father Garib Jha (now dead) was there at a baithka constructed over the ridge of a Tank in the night and while he was washing his mouth, appellants-accused Gopajee Kamat (now dead), Jhingur Kamat, Gaunu Kamat, Jaleshwar Kamat, Jiwachh Kamat, Bhim Kamat, Bauka Kamat, Faudar Kamat, Kameshwar Kamat and Shakti Kamati came armed with bhala, Kulhari and lathi reached there and surrounded the informant and his father and accused Jivachh Kamat gave bhala blow to the informant Satyan Narayan Jha (P.W. 3) on his chest, however, the said assault hit his hand and blood started oozing out. Appellant Bauka Kamat assaulted the father of informant Garib Jha by means of bhala on his left chest and appellant Kameshwar Kamat assaulted on the left hand of the said Garib Jha. Accused Gopaljee Kamat assaulted father of informant Garib Jha on his left hand and accused Shakti Kamat inflicted bhala blow on the thumb of the father of informant Garib Jha and after sustaining injuries, the said Garib Jha fell down on the ground and, thereafter remaining appellants including co-accused of this case assaulted him by means of lathi. On hulla, people assembled and appellants and other accused persons fled away.

4. The aforesaid fardbeyan of informant, led to registration of Rajnagar P.S. Case No. 12 of 1980. Police after investigation submitted charge-sheet. Cognizance of the offence was taken and the case was committed to the court of Sessions, which ultimately came to the file of Shri Paras Nath, Presidding Officer, Additional Court (F.T.C. No. 1), Madhubani for trial and disposal.

5. To prove its case, prosecution examined altogether three witnesses. They are:

P.W. 1 – Bachu Jha @ Ramakant Jha, P.W. 2 Feku Chaudhary and P.W. 3 – Satya Narayan Jha (informant) One witness has been examined on behalf of the Court i.e. Doctor Y. Jha. In this case Investigating Officer has not been examined and further the father of informant i.e. Garib Jha could also not been examined as he died during pendency of the trial.

6. Neither oral nor do