IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of corroborating evidence and the need for a clear determination of the aggressor in assault cases.

JUDGMENT :

(Ratnaker Bhengra, J.) :

These criminal appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence both dated 12th August, 2010, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Godda in sessions case No. 104/2009, whereby and where under all the appellants were convicted under sections 307/149 and section 148 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant Deo Narayan Yadav was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for four years and fine of Rs. 2000/-and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days for his conviction under section 307/149 of IPC and remaining remaining appellants were sentenced to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 2,000/-each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days for their conviction under section 307/ 149 of IPC. All the appellants were sentenced to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 1,000/-each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 days for their conviction under section 148 of IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. A letter has been sent by officer-in charge of Pathargama Police station, stating that appellant no. 2 Madan Lal Yadav, in Criminal Appeal(SJ) no. 763/2010 has died. Hence, appeal of Madan Lal Yadav stands abated.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, as per the written report dated 16.04.2008 of the informant PW-8 Kalachand Yadav is that on 16.04.2008, at about 2 pm, the informant was sitting in his house. In the meantime the accused persons Ramjee Yadav, Deo Narayan Yadav, Sita Yadav, Jailal Yadav, Madan Yadav, Robin Yadav, Bunti Devi, wife of Ram Jee Yadav and wife of Madan Yadav, armed with weapons entered into the house of the informant with intention to murder the informant. The accused persons dragged the informant and assaulted the informant on his head with iron rod as a result informant sustained injury and fell down on the ground and thereafter, the accused persons assaulted the informant with lathi, danda and fist blows. Informant further stated that his wife Nilima Devi, wife of his brother Birbal Yadav and Birbal Yadav’s son Sushil Yadav came to the place of occurrence, then, the accused persons assaulted them as a result they also sustained injuries. Ramjee Yadav took away Rs. 500/- from the pocket of the informant and Deo Narayan Yadav took away the silver 'pahuchi' weighing 12 bhars of the informant’s wife and Madan Lal Yadav took away the silver chain of the informant’s bhabhi. Informant further stated that on halla villagers assembled and pacified the matter.

4. On the basis of written report FIR being Pathargama P.S. Case No. 69 of 2008 dated 16.04.2008 was registered against the appellants under sections 147, 148, 149, 448, 323, 307, 379 and 504 of IPC. After completion of 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 against all the appellants under sections 307/ 149, 323, 448 and 148 IPC and trial was held. At the conclusion of the trial appellants were convicted and sentenced as aforesaid, hence, this appeal.

5. Prosecution had examined altogether 9 witnesses out of whom PW-8 Kalachand Yadav is the informant of the case; PW-1 is Yudhistir Yadav, who is the nephew of the informant; PW-2 is Birbal Yadav, who is the brother of the informant; PW-3 is Gopal Yadav; PW-4 is Dr. Dilip Kumar Choudhary; PW-5 is Dr. Jaishree; PW-6 is ASI Ajay Kumar Singh, who is the Investigating Officer of the case; PW-7 is Bhukhan Yadav, who is another brother of the informant and PW-9 is Naru Yadav.

6. Defence had examined one witness DW-1 Deen Dayal Yadav and exhibited certified copy of FIR of Pathargama P.S. Case No. 67/2008 dated 16.04.2008 which has been marked as Ext.-A and certified copy of order dated 06.02.2009 of J.M., 1st. Class, Godda in G.R. Case No. 399/2008, corresponding to T.R. No. -788/2009 which has been was marked Ext.-B.