1. At the out set, it is submitted that the accused appellant has been released from Jail on 16.5.2010 after undergoing the entire substantive sentence including remission granted by the State.

2. Appellant Arjun Ram along with three others were charged under Sections 323, 341, 307/34 and 302/34 IPC for intentionally causing the death of Mathura Ram (Kahar) on 6.11.1995 and also for voluntarily causing hurt to Mathura Ram (Kahar), Basudeo Kahar, Ram Kishun Kahar, Anjani Devi and Sundri Devi. By the impugned judgment rendered by the court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih dated 4.2.2000 in Sessions Trial No.113/96 the appellant herein was convicted for the offences under Sections 302 and 341 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default whereof to suffer three months simple imprisonment. The other three accused persons were held guilty under Sections 323 and 341 IPC.

3. In short the prosecution case is that the aforesaid accused persons including the appellant in furtherance of their common intention on 6.11.1995 at village Nawadih, P.S. Bagodar (Sariya), District Giridih had voluntarily caused hurt to Mathura Kahar, Basudeo Kahar, Ram Kishun Kahar, Anjani Devi and Sundri Devi and attempted to take away their life. Accused Jagdish Ram was further charged under Section 325 IPC for causing grievous hurt to Anjani Devi and Mathura Kahar on the same day of occurrence. The present appellant was charged under Sections 302 and 325 IPC for having caused death of Mathura Kahar and further causing grievous injury on the person of Ram Kishun Kahar by means of Tangi.

4. The fardbeyan of informant Tejo Kahar was recorded on 6.11.1995 at 14/15 hours, which, inter alia, alleged that his wife Anjani Devi was restrained by the accused while returning home after cutting paddy crops and was also assaulted. The informant along with his son and other members of his family rushed to the place of occurrence on hearing hulla and while trying to rescue Anjani Devi, were also assaulted by the accused persons by means of tangi, lathi etc., as a result of which they sustained injuries. During course of investigation Section 307 IPC was added and since the injured Mathura Kahar succumbed to his injury, Section 302 IPC was also added by order-sheet dated 16.11.1995. Upon submission of charge-sheet against four named accused persons under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 302/34 IPC, cognizance was taken against the accused persons and all the four accused persons were committed to the court of sessions. The accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charges and thereafter the trial commenced.

5. Eight witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution while 3 on behalf of the defence. One witness Pradeep Kumar was examined as court witness no.1.

6. The accused persons tried to make out a case that they were assaulted by the informant and his companions which resulted in institution of Bagodar (Sariya) P.S. Case No. 243/95 earlier in time. The learned trial court, after appreciation of the testimony of the prosecution witnesses nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4, all of them were injured witnesses and had consistently stated that the accused appellant Arjun Ram was armed with tangi and had given tangi blow on the head of the deceased Mathura Kahar, found no reason to disbelieve their statements only on the ground that they were interested witnesses and not independent witnesses. Injuries found on the body of the deceased Mathura Kahar coupled with the categorical statement that the accused Arjun Ram had inflicted injuries by means of tangi on the head of the deceased, clearly pointing out to the intention of the accused found the charge under Section 302 IPC established against the accused-appellant herein beyond the shadow of any reasonable doubt. The learned trial court also took into account the argument advanced by the defence relating to the delay in sending the FIR by observing that the instant incidence was