Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J.

Aggrieved by the judgment dated 08.11.2007, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kinnaur Sessions Division at Rampur Bushahr, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 43 of 2003, whereby the respondents (hereinafter referred to as the "accused persons") have been acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 147, 302, 307, 341 and 148 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, the State of Himachal Pradesh has preferred this appeal on the grounds, inter-alia, that learned trial Court has not only failed to view the evidence produced by the prosecution in its right perspective but also set unrealistic standards to evaluate the same.

2. The reasoning as given by learned trial Court for recording of findings of acquittal are manifestly unreasonable and unsustainable in the eyes of law and the evidence qua occurrence as has come on record by way of the eye witnesses count, has been erroneously discarded for untenable reasons. It is pointed out that PW-1 Goverdhan Singh, PW-2 Roshan Lal, PW-3 Hem Raj, PW-5 Sunil Kumar, PW-6 Hira Singh and PW-8 Dharam Pal, have categorically stated that it is the accused persons who firstly assaulted PW-2 Roshan Lal and when deceased Kaul Ram came to his rescue, accused Jai Chand inflicted bat blow on his head and as a result thereof, he felldown and became unconscious. Lateron, he succumbed to the injuries so received on the way to Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Shimla, for treatment. Such evidence could have not been ignored. The witnesses had been watching the cricket tournament w.e.f. 15.01.2003 to 19.01.2003 and as such had an occasion to identify the accused persons, none-else, but the members of Jahu team. Otherwise also, the witnesses, particularly the eye witnesses, were not expected to know the names of all the accused persons nor is there any legal requirement or rule of prudence that the witnesses must know the names of the accused persons also. Learned trial Court, as such, has erred in law while recording the findings that for want of identification parade and the names of the accused persons were not mentioned in the FIR, they could have not been connected with the commission of the offence. The witnesses, on the other hand, have identified accused Subhash Chand, Vicky, Inder Singh and Jai Chand, while in the witness-box and during the course of recording their statements in the Court.

The identity of the accused persons even stands established from the testimonies of hostile witnesses, i.e. PW-3 Hem Raj and PW-5 Sunil Kumar. Therefore, learned trial Court has committed illegality while rejecting the evidence as has come on record from the testimony of eye witnesses by giving undue weightage to minor contradictions and omission occurred in the prosecution evidence. The prosecution case that it is accused Subhash Chand who firstly mounted on the stage, when PW-2 Roshan Lal was winding up the goods lying there and started beating the said witness and the remaining accused joined him subsequently in administering beating, is satisfactorily proved on record, however, erroneously brushed burst aside. The fatal injury inflicted on the head of deceased Kaul Ram by accused Jai Chand, is also established on record from the testimonies of eye witnesses. The accused persons, allegedly members of Jahu team, had motive to beat PW-2 Roshan Lal and kill deceased Kaul Ram as they lost the cricket match. The findings to the contrary are also stated to be wrong. The impugned judgment, as such, has been sought to be quashed and set aside.

3. The prosecution case as disclosed from the record, in a nut shell, is that FIR Ext. PW-20/C came to be lodged against the accused persons at the instance of PW-1 Goverdhan Singh with the allegation that a cricket tournament was organized at Village Kofta, Tehsil Nankhari, District Shimla, w.e.f. 15.01.2003 to 19.01.2003. Around twenty cricket teams participated in this tournament. The final match was played on 19.01.200