ORDER :

1. The present criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant claiming the following reliefs:-

“It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that the appeal of the appellant may kindly be allowed and he be acquitted.”

2. The matter pertains to an incident that occurred in the year 1996 and the present appeal has been pending since 2000.

3. Vide impugned judgment dated 15.11.2000 the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Barmer in Sessions Case No.16/97 convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 307 & 452 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo 3 years R.I. along with a fine of Rs.5000/-default in payment of which he was to further undergo 6 month R.I. and sentenced him to undergo 6 months R.I. along with a fine of Rs.1000/-default in payment of which he was to further undergo 1 month R.I. respectively.

4. Learned counsel for the accused-appellant(s) submits that the accused-appellant(s) do not have any criminal antecedents to his discredit.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the incident is alleged to have been happened on 09.12.1996 at about 11:00 PM when it was reported that the complainant along with a large number of persons caused the injuries, which resulted into the present dispute and thereafter the investigation started and challan has been filed under Sections 147, 148, 323, 325, 307 & 458 of IPC. Learned counsel further submits that there were five accused, namely, Kailash Dan, Murardan, Ratan Dan, Uttam Dan, and Hetudan against whom investigating authority did not file challan.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that challan was filed against the nine persons, out of them, two persons Dhan Singh and Kumerdan were discharged at that stage itself. Learned counsel also submits that thereafter out of the seven remaining accused Jeevan Dan, Durgadan, Chanan Dan, Narayan Dan, Durjan Singh, Dana Singh were acquitted and only the present petitioner Vijaidan has been convicted.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court to the observation by the learned trial court that the over-implication in the matter has caused serious doubts in the prosecution story, as the same is neither supported by the medical injuries nor supported by the evidence in question. The blunt side axe having been used by the present appellant to cause the injury has been found to be proved. Learned counsel further submits that the learned trial court has intentionally deliberated into the fact and arrived at a conclusion that the large part of the allegations are false and only a small part is truth, but at the same time, learned trial court has observed that if truth and false is mixed then it is a duty of the learned trial court to segregate the same and come to the truth amongst the false and arrived at a conclusion in the such matters.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown to this Court that there is inconsistency amongst the prosecution witnesses and also delay in taking the deposition by the Investigating Officer of the eye-witnesses. Learned counsel also submits that there is no recovery which has been made. Learned counsel also drawn attention of this Court to the statements of PW-1 to PW-7 who have broadly supported the story of the prosecution. Learned counsel has also taken this Court to the evidence of PW-12 Derawar Singh, PW-16-Nakhat Singh, PW-17-Samela Ram & PW18 Govind Dan, who were turned hostile and did not support the prosecution story.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the learned trial court had arrived at a conclusion that the matter is overblown version because even the medical report did not contain the injuries which could have been caused by so many persons, as alleged, though there were grievous injuries which are supported by the medical evidence. Learned counsel further submits that the number of injuries as well as the blunt nature of injuries are, even if proved, sufficient to indicate that the case woul