JUDGMENT :

Ratnaker Bhengra, J.

Heard Mr. Pramod Kumar, the learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mrs. Vandana Bharti, the learned APP for the State.

2. Report of Superintendent of Police, Koderma, vide memo no. 51 dated 01-02-2020 has been received stating that the Appellant no. 1 Jobraj Mahto has died and letter to this effect of mukhiya of village-Badaki Dhamrai, Block-Chandwara, District-Koderma has been annexed. Hence, appeal of Appellant no. 1 Jobraj Mahto, stands abated.

3. Both the criminal appeals are preferred against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence, both dated 16.04.2010, passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Koderma in Sessions Trial No. 446 of 1998, whereby and whereunder, all the appellants were convicted under Sections 147, 341 and 323 of the Penal Code, 1860 and the appellant Basudeo Mahto was further convicted under sections 324, 326 and 307 of the Penal Code, 1860. All the appellants were sentenced to undergo SI for one month each under Section 341 of the Penal Code, 1860; RI for one year each for the offence under Section 323 of the Penal Code, 1860 and RI for one year each for the offence under Section 147 of the Penal Code, 1860. Appellant Basudeo Mahto was further sentenced to undergo RI for two years under Section 324 of the Penal Code, 1860; RI for three years for the offence under Section 326 of the Penal Code, 1860 and RI for five years for the offence under Section 307 of the Penal Code, 1860. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently and the period undergone in custody during investigation and trial was directed to be set-off.

4. The case of the prosecution, in brief, as per fardbeyan dated 02.07.1996 of the informant PW-4 Lakho Mahto, recorded at 20 : 30 hours at Koderma Sub-divisional Hospital is that informant on 02.07.1996 at about 06 : 00 am in the morning was sowing maize in his land situated in the simana (boundary) at village Belkhara along with his son Kokil Mahto (PW-3) and wife Sahodari Devi. At about 03.00 pm Jobraj Mahto, Rajendra Mahto, Basudeo Mahto, Revali Devi, wife of Basudeo Mahto and wife of Rajendra Mahto armed with sword, farsa and tangi came to his land and asked as to why he had dashed his fencing upon which the informant replied it was fallen from before. In the meantime, Basudeo Mahto assaulted Kokil Mahto with sword on his neck and in order to protect himself Kokil Mahto sustained injury on his finger and Kokil Mahto fell down on the ground. Informant and his wife tried to save his son upon which other accused persons assaulted them with farsa and tangi as a result they were also injured. Informant further stated that incident occurred due to land dispute.

5. On the basis of the fardbeyan of informant formal FIR was registered as Jai Nagar P.S. Case no. 43/1996 dated 03.07.1996 under sections 147, 341, 324 and 307 of IPC against the appellants. After investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the appellants and cognizance of the offences were taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Charges were framed under sections 147, 341, 323 and 307 of IPC against all the appellants and appellant Basudeo Mahto was further charged under section 324 and 326 IPC. Trial was held and at the conclusion of the trial appellants were convicted and sentenced as aforesaid. Hence, this appeal.

6. Prosecution had examined altogether six witnesses out of whom PW-4 Lakho Mahto is the informant of the case; PW-3 Kokil Mahto is the son of the informant; PW-1 is Yogendra Mahto; PW-2 is Arjun Mahto; PW-5 is Ram Suresh Singh, who is the Investigating officer of the case and PW-6 is a formal witness (advocate clerk) who had proved three injury reports which were marked as Ext.-3 to Ext.-3/2.

7. PW-4 Lakho Mahto is the informant of this case. Informant has stated in his evidence that on the day of occurrence he was at his field situated at Belkhara along with his wife Sahodari Devi and son Kokil Mahto and were sowing maize in the field