Conviction for attempted murder requires clear intent, and evidence of extortion must be proven beyond reasonable doubt; insufficient evidence led to modifications in charges.

JUDGMENT :

SONI SHRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned APP for the State.

2. This criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.11.2004 and 30.11.2004 respectively, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Begusarai in Sessions Trial No.21 of 2002 (arising out of Ballia P.S. Case No.126 of 2001), whereby and whereunder the appellants have been convicted under Section 307 and 386 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘I.P.C.’) and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under /34 I.P.C. and they have been further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years under Section 386 /34 I.P.C. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3. Factual matrix of the case is that Ballia P.S. Case No.126 of 2001 dated 07.08.2001 was instituted under Sections 341 , 307, 504 and 386/34 of the I.P.C. on the basis of the statement of the informant, Girdhar Sah (P.W. 6) recorded before the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Mr. S.P. Singh of Ballia Police Station in the clinic of Dr. Nalini Ranjan Singh where his son, Ram Pravesh Sah was brought for treatment with the allegation in succinct that Hare Ram Yadav, Ram Narain Yadav and Manoj Yadav, who are the appellant nos.1, 2 and 3 respectively herein, came to his residence and demanded extortion money of Rs.1000/- and upon the informant’s refusal to fulfill their demand, Hare Ram Yadav abused the informant and told that he has earned a lot and insisted on the payment of extortion money. Meanwhile, the son of the informant, Ram Pravesh Sah intervened in the matter and said that he would lodge complain to the police whereupon, they abused him and meanwhile, Ramnath Yadav (appellant no.4) and Rishideo Yadav (appellant no.5) came there and Hare Ram Yadav (appellant no.1) exhorted to kill. On the exhortation made by Hare Ram Yadav, Ramnath Yadav (appellant no.4) threw the son of the informant on the ground and Manoj Yadav (appellant no.3) and Rishideo Yadav (appellant no.5) put lathi on both sides of his neck and tried to kill him by pressing the lathi. Thereafter, the informant brought Rs.1000/- and gave it to the accused persons but in spite of that they brutally assaulted his son on his abdomen, chest and leg by lathi. Hare Ram Yadav hurled pistol for terrorizing them. Seeing the serious condition of the son of the informant, he was taken to the clinic of Dr. Nalini Ranjan Singh where he was treated.

4. Aforesaid case was investigated by the police and on conclusion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet against the accused persons under Sections 341 , 307, 504 and 386/34 of the IPC whereafter the learned Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and committed the case to the court of sessions, numbered as Sessions Trial No. 21 of 2002. Charges against the accused persons were framed under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the and Section 386 of the I.P.C. to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution has examined altogether nine witnesses, namely, Ghuran Sah (P.W.1), Shukhdeo Sah (P.W.2), Shiv Shankar Sah alias Shankar Sah (P.W.3), Babua Sah (P.W.4), Nago Sah (P.W.5), informant, Girdhar Sah (P.W.6), injured victim, Ram Pravesh Sah (P.W.7), Dr. Nalini Ranjan Singh (P.W.8) who treated the injured in his clinic and Sabhapati Singh (P.W.9), the Investigating Officer of the case. One witness was also examined on behalf of the defence as D.W.1-Abhay Prasad Bhardwaj, who has proved the notice Ext.A in this