JUDGMENT :

RAJESH KUMAR, J.

1. Both these Criminal Appeals are being heard together and disposed of by this common judgment as both these appeals are arising out from the same order of judgment and conviction.

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

3. These appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 06.03.2006 passed by Shri Kamalesh Mishra, Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Sahibganj in Sessions Case No. 181 of 2004/S.T. No. 102 of 2005 whereby and whereunder the accused Saroj Dan @ Saroj Kumar Dan has been convicted for the offence under Sections 324/452 of the Indian Penal Code and the accused namely Ajit Kumar Dan @ Ajit Dan and Prabir Kumar Dan @ Prabir Dan have been convicted for the offence under Section 342 of the Indian Penal Code and the accused Saroj Dan @ Saroj Kumar Dan has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for three and half years and for the offence under Section 452 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for six months for the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences shall run concurrently. The accused namely Ajit Kumar Dan @ Ajit Dan and Prabir Kumar Dan @ Prabir Dan convicted for the offence under Section 342 of the Indian Penal Code and have been given benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act.

4. Barhait P.S. Case No. 58 of 2003 has been registered under Section 452/341/342/324/ 326/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code against these appellants on the fardbeyan of the informant namely Shivnandan Swarnkar, (PW-6). As per the FIR at about 11.30 P.M. on 23.08.2003 while the informant/victim was sleeping in his shop, the accused namely Saroj Dan @ Saroj Kumar Dan has entered the shop and has caused sharp cutting injury to him by using Dab. On raising hulla, he has fled away. Thereafter accused Ajit Kumar Dan @ Ajit Dan and Prabir Kumar Dan @ Prabir Dan, father and uncle of the accused Saroj Dan @ Saroj Kumar Dan came to the shop and locked the informant and treated him. The dispute is regarding love triangle as the same girl is being loved by the informant as well as Saroj Dan @ Saroj Kumar Dan.

5. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons and after cognizance was taken, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Charges were framed under Sections 341/342/324/307/452 of the Indian Penal Code against all these accused persons, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. On conclusion of the prosecution case, statement of the accused persons under Section 313 of the Cr. P.C. was recorded, to which they pleaded not guilty.

7. Being aggrieved, the present appeals have been filed.

8. To substantiate the charges, altogether seven witnesses have been examined by the prosecution. PW-1, Birbal Turi, PW-2, Subhash Rudge, PW-3, Bishwanath Sen, PW-4, Nizamuddin have been declared hostile. PW-5 Dr. Anil Kumar Marandi, who has testified the injury. Injury report is Ext.2 which is as follows:-

“He has found four sharp cut injuries (i) at his left chick (ii) at the back of his neck (iii) multiple sharp cut wound on his head and (iv) sharp cut injury at his left ear. This witness has further accepted that all the injuries are simple in nature and were caused by sharp cut weapons like dab and prepared the injury report of Shivnandan Swarnkar in his pen and signature and has exhibited it as Ext.2.

Length and breadth have not been disclosed.

PW-6 is the informant-Shivnandan Swarnkar, who has supported the story as disclosed in the FIR, but in his cross-examination, he has changed the motive and has deposed that there is no dispute regarding love triangle.

PW-7, John Martin Ekka, is the Investigating Officer, who has supported the investigation.”

9. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that there is only one witness i.e. the informant - PW-6, who has deposed in his cross-examination that there is no love triangle and as such, there is a material cont