Point of Law: Testimony of interested witnesses is not a sole criterion to disbelieve their versions.

JUDGMENT :

Bhatnagar, J.

1. The appellant State has filed an appeal under Section 378(iii) & (i) of the Cr.P.C. against the judgment dated 18.07.1991 passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Bikaner (for short 'the trial court') in Sessions Case No.46/89, whereby respondent Megharam was acquitted for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 323/149 IPC and other respondents Ladhuram, Babulal, Munaram, Himmataram, Gangaram, Bhojaram, Kojaram, Bhomaram, Panaram and Magnaram were acquitted for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 & 323/149 IPC.

2. Brief facts of the case are that one Bhikharam lodged a report (Exhibit-P/1) dated 20.03.1989 at Police Station Kolayat stating therein that on 21.03.1989 marriage of Govindram's son was going to be solemnized; however, on account of the enmity between Megharam's party and the complainant, he was forbidden to attend the marriage and the villagers called both the parties near the well on 20.03.1989 for settling their disputes. When the complainant's party, including Bhikharam Muknaram, Savantaram, Urjaram, Utmaram, Deeparam, Mohanram etc., reached the well, members of the accused party, namely Megharam, Bhomaram, Gangaram, Munaram, Babulal, Kojaram, Ladhuram, Magnaram, Bhojaram, Himmataram and Panaram were already standing there having Lathi, Bachiyan and Axe in their hands and attacked the complainant's party. Babulal inflicted an axe blow on the head of Bhikahram, and Megharam inflicted a lathi blow on the head of Sanvantaram. As a result, Savantaram became unconscious, and Deeparam, Urjaram, Muknaram, Utmaram and Mohanram also got injured in the incident.

3. On receiving the report (Exhibit-P/1), the police registered a case under Sections 341, 323, 147, 148 and 149 I.P.C. and started investigation.

4. Savantaram succumbed to his injuries, and his postmortem (Exhibit-P/12) was done on 22.03.1989, and other persons, namely Muknaram, Deeparam, Urjaram, Tanaram, Bhikharam, Mohanram & Utmaram, suffered injuries.

5. After a thorough investigation, the police filed a challan against the accused before the Addl. Munsif and Judicial Magistrate No.1, Bikaner, after that, the case was committed to the trial court.

6. The accused persons were read over the charges on 22.5.1989; however, they denied the same and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecution has produced as many as thirteen witnesses and got the statements of accused respondents recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; however, they did not examine any witness.

7. After hearing arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and scrutinizing the evidence available on record, the trial court acquitted the accused-respondents for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302, 302/149 & 323/149 IPC.

8. Assailing the judgment dated 18.07.1991 passed by the trial court, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the trial court has grossly erred in acquitting the respondent Megharam for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 302 and 323/149 IPC and other respondents Ladhuram, Babulal, Munaram, Himmataram, Gangaram, Bhojaram, Kojaram, Bhomaram, Panaram & Magnaram for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 & 323/149 IPC.

9. The counsel argued that though the eyewitnesses have supported the prosecution case, yet the trial court illegally disbelieved their testimonies and erred in acquitting the accused respondents. Furthermore, it is contended that the learned trial court has also erred in not considering the statements of PW-9 Dr R.K. Gehlot and PW-12 Dr Nar Singh Bittu.

10. The learned counsel argued that the statements of prosecution witnesses reveal that the accused party attacked the complainant's party when they assembled for compromise. He further argued that the learned trial court has erred in recording the finding that the prosecution needs to explain the injuries sustained by the accused respondents. He further argued that the prosecution need not to explain the injuries, which are simple in nature a