The presence of injured eyewitnesses and corroborative medical evidence justifies a conviction, affirming the principle that familial relationships do not undermine testimonial credibility.

JUDGMENT :

VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.

Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (for brevity ‘APP’) for the respondent-State.

2. This appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity ‘the Cr.P.C.’) against the judgment of conviction dated 12-06-2014, and order of sentence dated 17-06-2014, rendered by the learned Ad-hoc Additional District and Sessions Judge 1^st, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Sessions Trial No. 200 of 2010, arising out of Mahua P.S. Case No. 93 of 2009, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 & 307 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (for brevity ‘the IPC’) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) under Section 302 of the IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo imprisonment for six months. The appellant has further been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Five Thousand) and in default of payment of fine to further undergo imprisonment for three months. However, all the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3. The Prosecution Story in brief is as under :-

3.1. The Informant Hasmul Nisha has recorded her fardbeyan on 24-03-2009 at about 05:45 P.M. at Primary Health Center, Mahua, stating therein that her husband and her elder son work at Nagpur and she lives with her three sons and one daughter at her father’s house situated in village Chakkaji Nizam. Two days ago, her brother, namely, Md. Murtuza demanded some cash to open a shop, whereafter she had given Rs. 9000/- but, her brother was demanding more money and, on her denial, he threatened to kill her as also her children. On 24-03-2009, at about 2.30 P.M., her brother called her sons, namely, Md. Irshad, Mr. Akhlaq and Md. Faiyaz and took them inside the room. After some time, grunting sound of her children came from that room and her elder son/Md. Irshad ran out of the room screaming. Upon this, when she and her daughter, namely, Nusrat Jahan ran into the said room, they saw Md. Akhlaq and Md. Faiyaz writhing on the ground and soaked in blood, in injured condition, and her brother was standing with Bhujali in his hand, which was blood stained. When she and her daughter started to lift both the sons, Md. Murtuza (appellant) started assaulting the Informant as well as her daughter by means of Bhujali with an intention to kill them due to which the Informant got injured and her daughter’s left hand wrist got cut and fell down. Meanwhile, when Informant’s father, namely, Md. Israel Ansari came to rescue, the appellant ran away from there by waiving his Bhujali and terrorizing the villagers.

4. After the registration of the FIR, the Investigating Agency commenced investigation, and during the course of investigation, the Investigating Agency recorded the statement of the witnesses and thereafter, collected other documentary evidences. Thereafter, the Investigating Agency filed the charge-sheet against the appellant before the concerned Magistrate Court. The concerned Magistrate committed the case under Section 209 of the Cr.P.C. to the concerned Sessions Court as the same was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions.

5. During the course of trial, the prosecution has examined 11 witnesses and also produced the documentary evidences. Thereafter, the statement of the appellant/accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. came to be recorded. After conclusion of the trial, the Trial Court passed the impugned order against which the appellant has preferred the present appeal.

6. Learned advocate for the a