Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the State.

2. All the aforesaid four appellants have been convicted vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence both dated 06.12.2003 passed in S.T. No.434 of 1995 (arising out of Jainagar P.S. Case No.73 of 1994 corresponding to G.R. No.798 of 1994) by the learned 1st Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Koderma, whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and directed to furnish bail bond of Rs.5,000/- each to keep peace and good behaviour with the informant as well as family members and by the same judgment the learned trial court has acquitted the appellants under Sections 379, 325, 341 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Against the aforesaid judgment and order of furnishing bond, the appeal has been preferred before this Court. The appeal has been admitted on 02.04.2004 and further execution of bail bond has been stayed by this Hon'ble Court.

3. The prosecution case is based upon the written report of the informant, Jagdish Modi on 16.12.2004 alleging therein that on 15.12.1994 (Thursday) while the informant was returning from his shop at Domchanch to his house on bicycle, having cash of Rs.1560/- in his pocket and as soon as he reached near Sindwar bush of Village Raghunia Tand at around 6 p.m., his own uncle, Rameshwar Modi, his sons, Ashok Modi, Binod Modi and nephew, Vijay Modi S/o Mahadeo Modi came armed with Lathi, Iron-rod etc., assaulted the informant so that he should leave the land. The informant has stated that he left the cycle and fell down. Thereafter Binod Modi has taken Rs.1560/- from his pocket. The informant has stated that all the accused persons are agnates and they had land disputes since long as these persons are not giving the share of the land for which the occurrence has been committed. The informant, in the injured conditions has stated that with the help of villagers he came to the Police Station and reported the matter.

On the basis of the aforesaid 'fardbeyan' of Jagdish Modi, informant, the Police instituted First Information Report being Jainagar P.S. Case No. 73 of 1994 (dated 16.12.1994) corresponding to G.R. No.798 of 1994.

4. After investigation, the Police submitted charge-sheet vide Charge-sheet No.07 of 1995 dated 29.01.1995 against the four accused persons under Sections 323, 341, 379, 325, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. Cognizance of the offence has been taken and the case has been committed to the Court of Sessions where charge has been framed against all the appellants under Sections 325/34, 307/34 and 341/34 I.P.C. and appellant, Binod Modi has been separately charged under Section 379 I.P.C. by the learned court below on 17.04.1999. The appellants pleaded innocence and thus, have been put for trial.

6. The prosecution in order to prove its case has examined altogether 9 witnesses. Rafique has been examined as P.W.1. This witness has not supported the case of the prosecution by saying that he has no knowledge about the occurrence.

Dwarika Prasad Saw has been examined as P.W.2. He is an hearsay witness.

Vinod Modi has been examined as P.W.3. He has not supported the prosecution case by saying that he has no knowledge about the occurrence.

Girdhari Sundi has been examined as P.W.4. He has also stated the same version that he has no knowledge about the occurrence.

Jagdish Modi, the informant of the case has been examined as P.W.5. This witness has reiterated the statements made in the First Information Report and submitted that there is land dispute with the accused persons and two cases are pending. He proved written report as Exhibit-1. In paragraphs 16 & 27 of the cross-examination, this witness has admitted the cases which are pending against him have been filed by the accused persons.

Smt. Kunti Devi has been examined as P.W.6. She is the wife of the informant, Jagdish Modi. She has stated that the occurrence took place at 8.00 p.m. on 15.12.1994 and