IMPORTANT POINT
The credibility of injured witnesses is significant and their testimonies cannot be dismissed solely due to their relationship with victims, supported by corroborative evidence.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. N. Deka, learned Amicus Curiae for the petitioners and Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the sole respondent/opposite party.

2. The present criminal revision petition under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed assailing judgment and order dated 08.07.2011 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (Sadar), Cachar, Silchar in G.R. Case No. 3406/2003, whereby the petitioners were convicted under Section 341/323/326/34 IPC and were sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment (SI) for 1 (one) month for the offences punishable under Sections 341/34 IPC, to undergo SI for 3 (three) months for the offence punishable under Sections 323/34 IPC and also 6 (six) months RI under Section 326/34 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- (one thousand only) each and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 2 (two) months.

3. Further challenge is against the appellate judgment and order dated 19.09.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (F.T.C.), Cachar, Silchar in Criminal Appeal No. 21/2011, whereby the aforesaid judgment and order dated 08.07.2011 passed by the trial court was upheld in the appeal preferred by the appellants.

4. As none represented the petitioners, when the matter was called for hearing, this court appointed Mr. N Deka, learned counsel, to represent the petitioners and the matter was again fixed for hearing. However, during the course of hearing also, none represented the petitioners except the Amicus. Accordingly, the Court proceeded with the hearing inasmuch as this revision is pending since the year 2013.

5. Before dealing with the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, let this court first record the prosecution case. The prosecution case, in a nutshell, is that on 12.12.2003 at about 09:30 am, victim Abdul Rashid Laskar (PW-2) while taking his daughter Rushna Begum (PW-3) to the house of her fathers-in-law, the accused persons, due to previous a grudge, armed with weapons, forcefully tried to take away Rushna Begum into their house, to which Abdul Rashid objected and resisted and on being resisted, the accused persons assaulted said Abdul Rashid and caused grievous injuries throughout his body. It is the further prosecution case that while Rushna Begum tried to save her father, the accused persons also assaulted her and forcefully took away her golden necklace of 1 ½ bhori, clothes and cash amount of Rs. 500/- from the brief case. On raising alarm ‘Bachao’, ‘Bachao’, by Rushna, nearby people rescued them from the accused and otherwise the accused might have killed them.

6. Alleging the aforesaid fact, an FIR was lodged before the Bihara Police Out-Post and accordingly, GD Entry was made and the same was forwarded to the Officer- In-Charge of Katigorah Police Station, which was registered as Katigorah P.S. Case No. 491/2003. The F.I.R. was lodged by PW-1, who was working in the nearby paddy field and reached the place of occurrence after hearing alarm raised by PW-3

7. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was laid under Sections 341/323/325/326/379/34 IPC against the accused persons. The learned Trial Judge after going through the materials on record framed charges under Sections 341/323/325/326/ 379/34 IPC and the same was explained and read over to the accused, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

8. During the trial, the prosecution examined as many as six witnesses. The accused persons were also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. However, the defence denied to adduce any evidence.

9. Thereafter the learned trial court convicted the petitioners, which was also upheld by the learned appellate court as recorded and detailed hereinabove.

10. Assailing the determination made by the learned courts below, Mr. N Deka, learned Amicus r