Jitendra Kumar, J. – Present Cr. Appeal SJ No. 1446 of 2022 has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 28.02.2022 and 05.03.2022 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge-1, Munger, in Sessions Trial No. 31 of 2004 whereby the Appellant was found guilty of offence punishable under section 307 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years with fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in case of default to pay the fine, additional simple imprisonment for 3 months for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and simple imprisonment of one year under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in case of default to pay the fine, additional simple imprisonment for one month.

2. The prosecution story, as emerging from the Fardbeyan of informant, in brief, is that on 09.05.1997 at 7:00 A.M. while the informant’s aunt Janki Devi was returning from her agricultural field after spraying ash on crops and when she reached near the house of Ambika Yadav, he raised the slogan of Jai Bajrangwali to which she protested and a quarrel took place in between them and the accused persons came and surrounded her and tried to assault her but he rescued her and ran towards the house but Ambika Yadav and Niranjan Yadav started firing hitting over his right hand, left side of abdomen and left leg. His brother Girish Yadav who came to rescue his mother was also assaulted with bricks causing injury over his eyes and both of them were taken to Sangrampur hospital where he was being treated. Bullet of gun fired by Niranjan Yadav hit him and Raso Yadav was asking the accused persons not to leave them alive.

3. The aforesaid Sessions Trial No. 31 of 2004 arises out of Sangrampur P.S. Case No. 56 of 1997 dated 09.05.1997 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 337, 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. This F.I.R. was lodged on the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant one Shankar Yadav against seven accused persons namely, Ambika Yadav, Rasho Yadav, Mogal Yadav @ Manoranjan Yadav, Niranjan Yadav (who is Appellant herein), Pappu Yadav, Bahadur Yadav and Naujodhi Yadav.

4. Subsequent to lodging of the F.I.R., investigation started and charge-sheet bearing No. 41 of 1998 dated 13.08.1998 was submitted against Ambika Yadav, Rasho Yadav, Manoranjan Yadav and Naujodhi Yadav for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 337, 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Supplementary charge-sheet bearing No. 106 of 1998 dated 30.11.1998 was also filed against three accused, namely, Niranjan Yadav (Appellant), Pappu Yadav and Bahadur Yadav for offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 337, 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

5. Subsequently, after cognizance of the offence, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and charge under Sections 323, 324, 337, 341 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act were framed against all the Accused persons, which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, trial started.

6. During the trial, following six witnesses were examined: –

(i) P.W.1- Shanker Yadav (informant)

(ii) P.W.2- Raj Kumar Yadav

(iii) P.W.3- Dashrath Yadav

(iv) P.W.4- Rajdhari Yadav

(v) P.W.5- Chunni Yadav

(vi) P.W.6- Dr. Vijay Kumar Gupta (Medical Officer)

7. The Prosecution has also exhibited the following documents during the trial: –

(i) Ext.-1- Signature of Informant on Fardbeyan

(ii) Ext.-2- Injury report prepared by Dr. Vijay Kr. Gupta.

8. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the Accused persons were also examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C offering them opportunity to explain the incriminating circumstances.

9. No evidence was led by the Accused persons in their defence.

10. Ld. Trial Court heard both the parties. Considering