1. By way of this appeal filed under Section 374 Cr.P.C., the appellants assail the judgment dated 1st April, 2017 and order on sentence dated 17th April, 2017 whereby they have been convicted for committing the offence punishable under Section 307/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of 5 years each with fine of Rs. 25,000/- each and in default, to undergo SI for six months.

2. In brief the prosecution case is that on the night intervening 5th/6th June, 2015 at about 12.25 a.m. DD No.3A Ex.PW-2/A was recorded at PS Bhajanpura about the information to PCR in respect of a stabbing incident near Pappu Chakki, Main Market, Bhajanpura and that the injured was being taken to the St.Stephens Hospital. The mobile number of informant (PW-17 Amar Singh) was recorded as 9718665144. The DD was assigned to Head Constable Jai Singh (PW-13) who left with Ct.Vikas (PW-12). On reaching the spot and finding no eye witness, Head constable Jai Singh left Ct.Vikas to guard the spot and reached St.Stephens Hospital and found injured Bijlesh @ Popal admitted there but was opined to be ‘unfit for statement’. As no eye witness was present at the spot or in the hospital, the DD entry was kept pending. Head Constable Jai Singh again visited the hospital at about 10.30 AM. The injured was still unfit and the injury was opined to be grievous caused by blunt object. At that time Sh.Amar Singh, PW-17, father of the injured ( who also informed the PCR) got his statement Ex.PW-3/A recorded on the basis of which FIR Ex.PW-1/B was recorded.

3. During investigation appellant No.1, Sumit was arrested and his father and brother, namely, Mahipal and Ankit, appellant Nos.2 and 3 herein, surrendered before the Court. The injured remained admitted in the hospital till 18th June, 2015 and after his discharge his statement was recorded on 21st June, 2015. During investigation, CCTV footage from ATM booth installed near the incident was also seized. After completion of investigation, all the appellants were sent to face trial for committing the offence punishable under Sections 307/34 IPC.

4. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined 23 witnesses. All the appellants/accused during their examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution case. DW-1, Inder (maternal Uncle of appellant No.1 Sumit) was examined to prove the plea of alibi taken by the appellant No.1, Sumit.

5. After appreciating the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and the defence witness, learned Trial Court was of the view that the plea of alibi taken by the Appellant No.1, Sumit by examining his maternal uncle Sh.Inder (DW-1) did not stand proved in the absence of any documentary evidence that DW-1 was running a gym workshop which was attended to by the appellant No.1, Sumit during that night. While relying on the testimony of PW-16 Sh.Bijlesh – the injured and PW-17 Sh.Amar Singh – the complainant/father of injured, the learned Trial Court held them guilty under Section 307/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 5 years each with fine of Rs. 20,000/- each in default to undergo SI for six months.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants, Mr.C.Mohan Rao has questioned the credibility and trustworthiness of the testimony of material public witnesses specially the injured and his father. Failure of the prosecution to play the CCTV footage which was collected during investigation was also taken to be a ground to seek the benefit of doubt to the appellants.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants has also submitted that it is admitted case that the parties are well known to each other being neighbours. PW-1, the complainant claimed having heard the instigation by appellant No.2 Mahipal to his two sons. But while calling the PCR, he informed it to be an incident of stabbing whereas as per the opinion on the MLC, the injuries were caused by blunt o