Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 31.01.2003 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/ Court No. 10 Varanasi in Sessions Trial No. 277 of 1997 (State Vs. Babloo and others) arising out of Case Crime No. C5 of 1995, Police Station Badagaon, District Varanasi, whereby appellants Babloo Yadav, Sachcha Ram, Lal Bahadur and Sita Ram were convicted for offence punishable under Section 324/34 Indian Penal Code (here-in-after referred to as "I.P.C.") and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years each.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 12.04.1995, Shri Jai Prakash, nephew of informant Durga Prasad, was coming from Varanasi city to his residence. When he reached near to "Pancho Shivala" which is about 4 Km. from his residence, at about 8:00 p.m., appellants/accused Babloo, Sachcha, Lal Bahadur and Sita Ram met him. They were sitting on the tea shop of Bharat Yadav. They caught hold Jai Prakash and on the point of country made pistol (Katta), they forcefully administered him something poisonous in tea. Jai Prakash became unconscious. On 13.04.1995 at 5:00 a.m. informant came to know from Somnath that Jai Prakash is lying on the road in unconscious condition. Informant took Jai Prakash to S.P. Gupta hospital, at Varanasi where Jai Prakash was admitted. After treatment he became conscious and narrated informant about incidence. On 15.04.1995, informant (Durga Prasad) went to police station but his report was not lodged. He sent written information to Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi by registered post but police has not taken any action. On application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. of the informant Durga Prasad, by order of concerned Magistrate, F.I.R. has been lodged on 03.05.1995 at Police Station Badagaon under Section 307 and 342 I.P.C. against accused/appellants. Jai Prakash was examined by Dr. C.M. Tiwari on 13.04.1995 at about 7:00 a.m. at S.P. Gupta hospital, Varanasi. As per medical report, there was no external injury on his body. Jai Prakash was conscious but he cannot walk, stand and sit independently. This was suspected case of poisoning. Stomach wash was preserved by Dr. C.M. Tiwari but same was not sent to chemical examination.

3. After investigation police has submitted charge sheet against accused/appellants under Sections 307 and 342 I.P.C.

4. Learned trial court has framed charges under Section 307/34, 342/31 I.P.C. against accused persons and explain charges to them. They have pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. To substantiate charges against the accused, prosecution has been examined PW-1 Durga Prasad (Inormant), PW-2 Somnath and PW-4 Jai Prakash (Injured) as a witnesses of facts and PW-3 Dr. C.M. Tiwari and PW-5 Sub Inspector Gopal Singh (Investigating Officer) as formal witnesses.

6. After closure of prosecution evidence, statement of accused persons under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded wherein they claimed their false implication and stated that witnesses of fact are deposing against them due to enmity.

7. In defence DW-1 Ramji @ Bhagat has been examined.

8. Upon detailed consideration of evidence on record, learned trial court found the guilt of accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 324/34 I.P.C. proved beyond reasonable doubt and passed the impugned order of conviction.

9. Aggrieved by the order of learned trial Judge, the appellants have preferred the instant criminal appeal.

10. Heard Shri P.C. Pandey, learned counsel for appellants and Shri L.D. Rajbhar, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

11. Learned counsel for appellants contended that F.I.R. of the incident has been lodged after inordinate delay without any explanation. There is material contradictions in statements of witnesses of facts. Prosecution story is unnatural and improbable. Even though learned trial court has passed the impugned order of conviction without properly appreciatin