An appellate court will not interfere with findings of guilt based on consistent witness testimony but may, in exercise of its discretion, apply statutory probation if a significant period has elapsed since the offense, prioritizing reformative justice over custodial sentencing.

JUDGMENT :

SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA, J.

1. Heard Mr. I.A. Hazariaka, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M.P. Goswami, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State respondent.

2. This revision is directed against the appellate court judgment and order dated 31.07.2009/11.08.2009, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Darrang at Mangaldai in Crl. Appeal No. 13(D-1) of 2007 by which the judgment and order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darrang, Mangaldai, dated 26.02.2007 passed in G.R. Case No. 800/2002 was modified by setting aside the conviction under Section 341 IPC and affirming the conviction of the appellant under Section 325 of the I.P.C alongwith a fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees fived thousand only) in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment of 1 (one) month..

3. The fact of the case in brief, is that on 17.11.2002 at about 3.00 P.M. at Hirapara under Kalaigaon Police Station in the Darrang District, the appellant gave blow over the leg of Sri Rajen Das (hereinafter mentioned as the injured person) by means of stick causing fracture of leg while he was returning home from Kaligaon after marketing having restrained him on the way. On the basis of an FIR regarding the matter, lodged by the wife of the injured person, Kaligaon P.S. Case No. 91/2002 under Sections 341/325 IPC has been registered and the Investigating Officer (I.O.) charge sheeted the appellant under the aforesaid Sections of law after causing investigation into the matter. The learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid after conducting the full trial of the case, giving rise to the aforesaid appeal.

4. I have perused the evidence on record. As per the medical record tendered by PW 7, the victim sustained injury on his right leg and lower third and there was fracture on his leg bone and the facture of both bones of right leg was detected from X-Ray. Although, the PW-7 during the cross-examination stated that such injury was caused by falling from bicycle, the injury itself was established.

5. PW- 6, Sri Rajen Das is the injured of the instant case. From his evidence, it reveals that the appellant gave a blow over his right leg from his back side by a stick and due to the blow he fell down and thereafter his relatives brought him to Kalaigaon Hospital first and therefrom, he was referred to Mangaldai Civil Hospital where he had to stay for 10 (ten) days as indoor patient and another 6/7 months time was taken for his recovery. In cross-examination, PW-6 has confirmed that the occurrence took place in front of the shop house of Sri Dhananjay Das. During cross-examination of the injured the defence side could not extract anything except denial. In cross- examination, it has been suggested by the defence side that the injured got such injury by falling over the ground from the bicycle due to collision with the bicycle of the appellant. The defence side has examined the aforesaid Dhananjay Das as DW-1. From the trend of cross examination of the injured person by the defence side, it has been clearly established that the injured sustained injury and the appellant was present on the spot at the time of getting such injury. From the evidence of DW-1, it reveals that due to collision of bicycle of the appellant and the injured person, they fell down from their bicycle but none of them sustained any injury. DW-1 further deposed that they sent the injured by boarding a hand-barrow, since the injured was not in a position to go on foot due to intoxication. But at the same time, DW-1 has stated that the injured purchased sugar from his shop and proceeded by riding a bicycle.

6. Upon consideration of the evidence, the learned appellate c