The testimonies of the witnesses hold greater evidentiary value than medical evidence, and in case of minor discrepancy, the ocular testimony prevails. The court should adopt the view favorable to the accused when two views are possible based on the evidence.

JUDGMENT :

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

1. The instant acquittal appeal has been filed by the State under Section 378(1) and (5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 10.03.2003 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Saraikella in S.T. Case No.41 of 2001 whereby and whereunder the charge framed against the respondents have been found to be not proved beyond all shadow of doubt and as such the accused persons, the respondents herein have been acquitted.

The criminal revision has also been filed by the informant against the judgment of acquittal dated 10.03.2003 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Saraikella in S.T. Case No.41 of 2001 whereby and whereunder the charge framed against the respondents have been found to be not proved beyond all shadow of doubt and as such the accused persons, the respondents herein have been acquitted.

2. Both the appeal and the revision since arise out of the judgment dated 10.03.2003 and as such both the cases have been directed to be heard together as would appear from the order dated 04.08.2016 and as such both the matters are being heard together and are being disposed of by the common judgment.

3. The brief facts of the case, as per the written statement made in fardbeyan, reads as under:

The informant-Krishna Chandra Oraon (P.W.-9) gave his written statement before the In-charge, P.S- Chandil that while he was with his elder brother, namely, Jagdish Chand Oraon (deceased) the accused persons Basudeo Sahu, Bhuvan Sahu, Indra Sahu and Santosh Sahu came there in his house and assaulted Jagdish Chandra Oraon with the sharp edged weapon and pistol due to which Jagdish Chandra Oraon became seriously injured and is under treatment in nursing home Golchakkar, Chandil.

4. On the basis of the said fardbeyan, the F.I.R. being Chandil P.S. Case No.103 of 2000 was instituted for commission of offence under Sections 448, 324, 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Late on Section 302/34 of I.P.C

The investigating agency on conclusion of investigation has not found the charge proved against the respondents for commission of offence under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code. The concerned court has issued notice vide dated 02.01.2001 asking the informant as to why the final form submitted be not accepted. Jagdish Chandra Oraon, subsequently, has died. The concerned court has accepted the objection against the final form submitted and took cognizance for the commission of offence under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions wherein charge has been framed against the accused persons under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code.

The accused persons having pleaded not guilty and claim for trial and accordingly the trial has commenced. The learned trial court has not found the accused persons/respondents guilty for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and accordingly the respondents were acquitted against which the present acquittal appeal as also the revision has been filed.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the revision petitioner have jointly assailed the judgment of acquittal on the following grounds:

(i) That the learned trial court has committed gross error in discarding the testimony of the eye witnesses i.e. P.W.-1, P.W-5 and P.W.-7 as also P.W.-9 wherein specific allegations have been levelled against the respondents and all the witnesses have consistently affirmed the prosecution story but in complete disregard thereto the judgment of acquittal has been passed and as such the same since suffers from perversity and therefore is not sustainable in the eye of law and is fit to be quashed and set aside and the accused persons be convicted for the commission of offence under Sections 147, 148 and 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code.

(ii) The learned trial court while passing the judgment of