JUDGMENT :

Navneet Kumar, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 25.09.20003 passed by the learned Addl. Distt. & Sessions Judge, First Track, Court No. 1, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum in Sessions Trial No. 757 of 1994 whereby the learned trial court after finding the guilt of the accused persons for the offence punishable u/s 341/323 of IPC and sentenced to them to undergo R.I. for a period of one year for the offence punishable u/s 323 of IPC and one month R.I. for the offence punishable u/s 341 IPC. It has further been directed that both the sentences would run concurrently.

2. Briefly stating the prosecution story as unfolded in the fardbeyan of Prasant Tiwary, whose statement was recorded by the A.S.I. Sri R.R. Prasad of Kamalpur Police Station on dated 05.01.1994 at 15:00 hours at village Nutandih in the District of East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur is as under:

On 05.01.1994 informant had gone to Bara Bazar from his village Kasmar on a bicycle along with his co-villager Manik Tiwary to purchase the household goods while they were returning from the Market to their village they found the aforesaid accused persons namely Sitaram Manjhi, Gurupado Manjhi and Tapan Manjhi all of Nutandih village armed with lathi were standing on the road towards its southern direction. As soon as the informant and his co-villager reached near them, the accused Sitraram Manjhi caught hold Manik Tiwary after dropping his lathi on the ground and the accused Gurupado Manjhi started beating him with kicks. At the order of the accused Sita Ram Manjhi the accused Tapan Manjhi inflicted lathi blow on the head of Manik Tiwary as a result of which he sustained wound on his head and there started bleeding. The informant tried to prevent the accused persons from assaulting Manik Tiwary then the accused persons turned towards him (informant) with a view to assault him then the informant leaving the bicycle there ran to the flour mill situated adjacent to the P.O. and took shelter there. Then he raised alarm, on the alarm the villager of Nutandih namely Rohan Manjhi, Rutu Gorai and Chittu Tiwary of village: Kasmar rushed towards the place of occurrence in the meantime the accused persons managed to escape. According to the informant the reason behind such incident was that during the last Aghan month Manik Tiwary had some confrontation with the aforesaid accused persons as they had committed theft of paddy crop from his (Manik Tiwary) field by harvesting it in a clandestine manner. The informant lastly stated in his fardbeyan that the accused persons had assaulted Manik Tiwary with lathi and got him seriously injured with an intention to kill him. He further stated that due to unconsciousness of the injured Manik Tiwary he was not in a fit condition to give his statement to the police with regard to the incident.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid fardbeyan, F.I.R. was registered and investigation was taken up and after investigation, the police submitted the charge-sheet in this case, on the basis of which, cognizance of the offence was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. The learned trial court after concluding the trial acquitted the appellant for the offence punishable u/s 307 of IPC and found them guilty for the offence punishable u/s 341/323 of IPC vide impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence which is under challenge.

4. Heard Mrs. Vani Tiwary, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Sardhu Mahto, learned A.P.P. for the State.

Arguments on behalf of the learned counsel for the appellants

5. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the

- Judgment passed by the learned trial court is illegal, unwarranted and not supported by the materials on record.

- Learned Trial court relied upon the evidence of hearsay witnesses without any basis.

- Learned trial court ought to have considered that conviction cannot be rest upon the basis of solitary eye witness whose statement has no