The testimony of injured eyewitnesses holds considerable weight, and the court affirmed their credibility in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDMENT :

Tirthankar Ghosh, J.

1.The present appeal has been preferred against the Judgment and Order of conviction and sentence dated 20.08.2019 passed by the Ld. Additional District and Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas wherein the Learned Trial Court was pleased to convict the appellants under Section 325 of IPC and sentenced them to suffer simple imprisonment for two (2) years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- i.d. to undergo simple imprisonment for further six months.

2. Noapara Police Station Case No. 68/08 dated 12.06.2008 was registered for investigation under Sections 326 /307/34 of IPC against the appellants and another. On the basis of an information furnished by Santoshi Shaw (PW-1) addressed to the Officer-in-Charge, Noapara Police Station complaining that on 12.06.2008, in between 10:00 A.M. to 10:15 A.M., her brother Kundan Shaw was shopping at Park Gate Bazaar. When her brother reached near the boundary of C.Q.S.A. office, at that time Ram Chandra Prasad @ Das and Rabi Prasad, resident of Ichhapur, Arabinda Pally along with their employee Kuddus Ansari were interacting with him in respect of previous business transactions. All of a sudden, the accused persons randomly assaulted on the head of her elder brother with a bicycle pump and a wooden log. As a result, her brother fell down on the road with severe bleeding injuries when local people took him to Dr. B.N. Bose Hospital for treatment. Her brother was admitted in the hospital as he was in a critical condition. The accused persons assaulted her brother with a view to kill him and accordingly, the complainant requested the police officer to take appropriate steps for punishing the guilty persons.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, Noapara Police Station Case No. 68/08 dated 12.06.2008 was registered for investigation and on completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted under Section 326 /307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and on 02.12.2009 the Ld. ACJM, Barrackpore was pleased to take cognizance of the offence and thereafter committed the case to the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, 1^st Court, Barrackpore. Records of the case suggest that one of the accused namely, one Kuddus Ansari did not appear before the Court and as such the case against him was filed as the harsher process of law failed to yield any result. Records reflect that the present appellants namely Ram Chandra Prasad and Rabi Prasad faced trial. The Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court - 2, Barrackpore was pleased to frame charges under /34 of IPC and Section 307 /34 of against them. The charges were read over to the appellants to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. The prosecution in order to prove its case relied upon thirteen witnesses, which included: P.W.1 Santoshi Shaw, complainant; P.W.2 Kundan Shaw, injured/victim; P.W.3 Badri Prasad Shaw, witness to the assault; P.W. 4 Mahendra Pratap Singh, cycle-shop owner; P.W.5 Shankar Das, neighbour; P.W.6 Om Prakash Shaw, neighbour; P.W.7 Ajoy Singh, neighbour; P.W.8 Jagannath Barman, constable/seizure-list witness; P.W.9 Dr. Samir Kumar Mandal, Doctor who treated PW-2; P.W.10 Saidul Haque Gazi, Sub-Inspector of Police who prepared the formal FIR; P.W.11 Prasanta Kumar Sahana, Sub- Inspector of Police, second investigating officer of the case; P.W.12 Dr. Ashok Bhattacharya, Doctor who initially examined P.W.2; P.W.13 Jagat Pati Jana, first investigating officer of the case.

5. The prosecution also relied upon number of documents, which included seizure list, injury report, letter of complaint, formal FIR, rough sketch-map with index. The wooden stick and the bicycle pump, which was seized by the police in course of investigation were marked as Mat Exhibit-1 and Mat Exhibit-2 respectively.

6. P.W.1, Santoshi Shaw is the complainant who deposed before the Court that the injured Kundan Shaw is her brother and the incident occurred on 12.06.2008 at 10:00/10:15 A.M. She informed the Court that