1. This appeal is directed against judgment dated 16.12.97 passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur in Sessions Trial No.420 of 1993. By the impugned judgment, accused/appellant Teman Yadav has been convicted under Sections 332 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and five years, respectively with a direction to run the sentences concurrently. Co-accused persons Lakshman and Devanti Devi have been acquitted of the charges framed against them.

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is as under:

On 19.9.1993, Jitendra Singh (PW-3) was posted as Head Constable at Police Station Ambikapur. Omprakash Tiwari (PW-2) was the owner of the land bearing survey No.69/2, 69/3 and 69/4 situated at village Kanakpur. On 07.9.93, the appellant, acquitted co-accused Lakshman and other persons, namely, Ramnath, Premnath, Lakhan, Pratap, Raman and Keshwar cut the crop of Omprakash Tiwari (PW-2). Omprakash Tiwari (PW-2) lodged First Information Report (Ex-P/5) in Police Station Ramanujganj. Head Constable Jitendra Singh (PW-3) went to village Kanakpur for enquiry and he called appellant Teman Yadav and on being enquired, appellant Teman ran away from there. Jitendra Singh (PW-3) chased and caught appellant Teman. Appellant Teman extricated himself from Jitendra Singh (PW-3) and caught the neck of Jitendra Singh (PW3). At that time, acquitted accused persons Lakshman and Devanti Devi came there and Devanti Devi assaulted Jitendra Singh (PW-3) with genda and Lakshman assaulted him with bahinga. At that time, appellant Teman pressed the neck of Jitendra Singh (PW-3). When Omprakash Tiwari (PW-2) tried to intervene to save Jitendra Singh (PW-3), Lakshman assaulted Omprakash Tiwari (PW-2). Jitendra Singh (PW-3) lodged First Information Report (Ex-P/8) in Police Station Ramanujganj. Jitendra Singh (PW-3) was sent to Primary Health Centre, Ramanujganj for medical examination. Dr. BR Sharma (PW-1) examined Jitendra Singh (PW-3) and gave his report (Ex-P/1), in which he found (1) contusion over right shoulder of 6 cm x 3 cm (2) contusion of 8cm x 3 cm over right side of wrist 2cm above the pelvic bone (3) contusion of 6cm x 3 cm over the left side of the waist (4) abrasion of ½ cm x ½ over the base of the right shoulder (5) contusion of 5cm x 2 cm over the right foot. In further investigation, shirt was seized from appellant Teman vide Ex-P/9.

After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the appellant and acquitted co-accused persons Lakshman and Devanti Devi in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ramanujganj, who, in turn, committed the case to the Court of Session, Ambikapur, from where it was received on transfer by First Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, who conducted the trial and convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned above and acquitted co-accused persons Lakshman and Devanti Devi of the charges framed against them.

3. Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant argued that the prosecution has not been able to prove that the appellant deterred Jitendra Singh (PW-3) from performing his official duty. Evidence of Jitendra Singh (PW-3) and Omprakash Tiwari (PW-2) are not reliable and do not prove that Jitendra Singh (PW-3) was deterred from performing any duty at the relevant time. Omprakash Tiwari (PW-2) is an interesting witness and the prosecution did not examine any independent witness, though many persons were present at the spot. Therefore, conviction recorded by the First Additional Sessions Judge is not sustainable and the appellant deserves to be acquitted.

4. On the contrary, Mr. AK Singh, learned Panel Lawyer for the State/ respondent opposed the above argument and supported the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of Sessions Trial No.420/93. The conviction of the appellant is based on the evidence of Jitendra Singh (PW