The court found that the evidence did not establish the intent required for serious charges under IPC Sections 307 and 450, modifying convictions to lesser offences based on the nature of injuries sustained.

JUDGMENT :

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

Heard Ms. Vandana Singh, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the appellants as well as Mr. Sunil Kumar Dubey, A.P.P. appearing for the State.

2. In compliance of the order dated 28.10.2024 passed by this Court regarding whereabouts of the appellants it is brought on record that appellant Niranjan yadav has died on 10.08.2020 and appellant Basu Yadav died on 14.12.2023. Since appellants no.1 and 3 have been died during the pendency of this appeal and no substitution application is on record, hence, the appeals related to appellant Niranjan Yadav and Basu Yadav stands abated. Rest of the appellants Jamadar yadav and Subesh Yadav, are re-numbered as appellant nos.1 and 2 respectively.

3. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 24.05.2006 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Pakur, in Sessions Case No. 152 of 2004, whereby and whereunder the appellants were held guilty and has been convicted for the offences under Sections 307 and 450 read with 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with a fine of Rs.1,000/- each under both sections with default stipulation.

Factual Matrix

4. The prosecution case is that on 23.09.2004, there was hot talk erupted between the informant and the main accused Nirajan Yadav (since deceased) at the cattle hut and accused Niranjan Yadav threatened to kill the informant. On the same day, at about 11:00 PM, all the accused persons including these appellants armed with danda, chansua and chheni forcibly entered into the house of the informant by breaking window and caught hold the informant and dragged him towards outside of the house. After hearing hulla, the brother of the informant woke up and came out, he was also caught hold by the accused persons and both of them were brutally assaulted. Informant was assaulted by danda and Chheni on his head, hand and legs and over whole body by appellant Basu Yadav and the brother of the informant was assaulted by Niranjan Yadav and Subesh Yadav. After hearing, hue and cry, the villagers assembled and the appellants fled away.

5. On the basis of aforesaid fardbeyan, Hiranpur P.S. Case no.54/2002 was registered under Sections 452 , 341, 323, 324, 325, 326, 307/34 of the I.P.C. was registered against accused/appellants.

6. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellants and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial and disposal.

7. In order to substantiate the charges leveled against accused persons, altogether 8 witnesses were examined by the prosecution.

8. The case of defence is denial from the occurrence and false implications. Further defence is that appellants are innocent and have not committed any offence.

9. After conclusion of trial the learned trial court, after appraisal of the evidence adduced on behalf of the parties, held the appellants guilty for the offences under Sections 307 and 450 read with 34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced as stated above.

10. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that there is allegation of assaulting upon the informant and his brother by deadly weapons like sharp weapon Chheni, but the injuries sustained by the informant and his brother are simple in nature caused by hard and blunt substance. Therefore, the ingredients of intention and knowledge required for constituting for the offence 307, is absolutely lacking in this case, which has been ignored by the learned trial court. Admittedly, there was previous enmity between the p