Ashutosh Kumar, J.—We have heard Sri Abul Kalam for the appellant, Mr. Binod Bihari Singh for the State and Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Sinha for the Informant.

2. The appellant, a jilted lover, has been convicted under Sections 324, 326 and 307 of the I.P.C. vide judgment dated 21.09.2016, passed by the learned 3rd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Begusarai in Sessions Trial No. 596 of 2008 and by order dated 27.09.2016, he has been sentenced to undergo RI for three years, rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs. 25,000/- and rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 25,000/- for non-payment of which the appellant is to suffer simple imprisonment of six months against offences under Sections 324, 307 and 326 respectively. The sentences have been directed to run concurrently. The amount of fine for both the offences viz. 307 and 326 of the IPC has been directed to be distributed amongst the two victims viz. P.W. 3 and P.W.4 in the ratio of 75%.

3. The Informant / one of the victims namely ‘X’ (we have eschewed from naming the Informant (P.W.4) and another victim ‘Y’/P.W.3 for the reason that they are girls still in their adolescence) has lodged FIR on 14.10.2007 at about 4 O’clock in the morning at Primary Health Center, Balia in the district of Begusarai that in the previous night while she and ‘Y’ had been sleeping on a cot in a room of her house, through the window of the room, the appellant and another threw acid as a result of which both ‘X’ and ‘Y’ were injured. This happened at around quarter to twelve in the night. Both the Informant and her sister cried out in pain when their mother (P.W.5) came. In the light of the torch, the mother and the Informant could identify the appellant and his father running away. Many persons of the neighborhood had arrived by that time. The cause behind throwing acid by the appellant was that about two months ago, the appellant had scaled over the wall of the house of the Informant but was caught and assaulted. The grudge that he had been harbouring made him commit the crime.

4. On the basis of the aforenoted Fardbeyan statement of P.W.4, a case vide Balia P.S. Case No. 202 of 2007 dated 14.09.2007 was registered for investigation for offences under Section 307, 324, 326 and 34 of the I.P.C.

5. During the course of investigation, it came to light that the appellant was not accompanied by his father/an old man and that his name had transpired in the Fardebyan and the statement of the mother of the victims out of mistake for no proper means of identification. In fact, the appellant was accompanied by one Md. Ashif, who is facing trial, at present, for the same offence.

6. The police submitted charge-sheet against the appellant whereafter cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the court of sessions for trial.

7. The trial court, after examining eight witnesses on behalf of prosecution including the Investigating Officer (P.W.7) and the Doctor (P.W.8), convicted and sentenced the appellant as noted above.

8. Mr. Abul Kalam, learned advocate for the appellant has strenuously argued that only because of some past occurrence, the appellant has been framed in this case by the two victims and her mother. He asserts that nobody had seen the appellant fleeing away from the place of occurrence and that the evidence with respect to throwing of acid leading to the scalding injuries on the two victims could not be proved beyond reasonable doubts.

9. The first statement about the occurrence of 14.09.2007 was made by the father of the victims which has never seen the light of the day.

10. It is necessary to be noted here that the father of the victims had died within a year of the occurrence.

11. Nonetheless, Mr. Kalam has argued that not bringing forth the first statement by the father of the victims regarding the occurrence clearly establishes that the prosecution has not come with the correct version and the implication of the appellant is only an afterthought after consultation and co