The central legal point established in the judgment is the reliability and special evidentiary status accorded to the testimony of an injured witness, the implications of enmity as a motive for the offence, and the limitations of faulty investigation on the criminal justice system.

JUDGMENT

Ananda Kumar Mukherjee, J. - This appeal has been filed under section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 assailing the impugned judgment and order dated 29.7.2004 passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Bankura in Sessions Case No. 16 (11) of 2001 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 1(4) of 2002, convicting the appellants for commission of offence punishable under section 448, 326 and 307 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years each and pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under section 307 of IPC and to a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for six months each and to pay a fine of Rs. 500 each in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months each for the offence punishable under section 448 of the Indian Penal Code with a further direction that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

2. Instant case arose out of Indpur Police Station Case No. 32 of 1999 dated 21.12.1999, on the basis of an FIR lodged by Adari Mandi, the wife of the injured person. In nutshell, the facts disclosed in the FIR is that on 20.12.1999 at about 10 P.M at Village Kharbari accused Nabin Tudu called her husband from bed and as soon as her husband went out of the house Laxmiram Tudu assaulted her husband on the left side of his head with an axe as a result he suffered bleeding injury and fell down. The de-facto complainant raised alarm. At the relevant time Laxmiram Tudu was again about to assault her husband but she held Laxmiram firmly. The axe fell from hand and injured the left leg of her husband. Adari Mandi tried to rescue her husband, when Jagannath Tudu the other accused pulled her away and again tried to assault her husband. At the relevant time co-villagers arrived and all the three accused persons ran away from their courtyard. Jiban Mandi was then taken to the police station by the de-facto complainant and other villagers from where he was sent to Indpur Primary Health Centre. The doctor medically treated her husband and referred him to Gobindonagar Hospital at Bankura where he was admitted in a serious and unconscious condition.

3. Police investigated into the FIR case, examine witnesses, seized weapon of assault and submitted charge sheet against the three accused persons under sections 448, 449, 326, 307/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. Appellants were called upon to answer the charge framed under four heads:

'That you, on or about the 20.12.99 at day of 22.00 hours at Kharbari, P.S. Indpur, Dist. Bankura, committed house trespass by entering into the building in the possession of Adari Mandi, w/o. Jiban Mandi, of Vill. Kharbari, used as a human dwelling with intent to commit an offence of criminal trespass and house trespass which a common intention.'

'That you, on or about the same accused. Committed house trespass by entering into the building in possession of the above-named persons used as human dwelling in order to commit the offence of murder punishable with death with a common intention.'

'That you, on or about the same accused at the same place voluntarily caused grievous hurt to Jiban Mandi by means of the instruments i.e. axe and Lathi which are the instrument for cutting and assaulting respectively with a common intention.'

'That you, the same accused, on day and same place causing hurt by axe and Lathi. Such intention and under such circumstances that if by that act you had caused the death of said Jiban Mandi, you would have been guilty of murder with a common intention.'

5. In order to prove the aforesaid charge prosecution has examined thirteen witnesses in all. Adari Mandi, the wife of the injured has been examined as PW- 1, Jiban Mandi the injured has been examined as PW-7, and two witnesses who claimed to have witnessed the occurrence are Ananda Mandi (PW-5) and Madan Hembram (PW-10). Suresh Mandi (PW-2), Bharat Murmu (P