Existence of credible eyewitness accounts can uphold conviction despite the absence of independent witnesses, particularly in cases involving known disputes. Intent and specific language for provocation under Section 504 IPC must be explicitly established.

JUDGMENT :

ZAFEER AHMAD, J.

1. Heard Sri Akhilesh Kumar Mishra holding brief of Sri Kunwar Dhananjay Singh learned counsel for the appellant no. 2 and 3, Sri Shishir Pradhan learned counsel for the appellant no. 4, Sri Arunendra learned A.G.A for the State and Sri Uma Kant Gupta learned counsel for complainant and perused the record.

2. The aforesaid criminal appeal arises out of order and judgment dated 15.10.2001 passed by VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Raebareli in S.T. No. 210 of 1995 (State v. Bhoolan & others) arising out of Case Crime no. 13 of 1993, wherein the applicants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment u/s 304 IPC r/w 34 Indian Penal Code (in short IPC), one year rigorous imprisonment u/s 325 IPC r/w 34 IPC, six months rigorous imprisonment u/s 504, 323 r/w 34 IPC, one year rigorous imprisonment u/s 506(2) along with a fine of Rs. 2000/- each and in default of payment of fine six months rigorous imprisonment each. It has further been provided that all the sentences shall run concurrently.

3. The appellant no. 1, namely, Bhullan, passed away during the pendency of the appeal, therefore, the appeal on behalf of the appellant no. 1 stands abated. The appeal survives only on behalf of appellants no. 2, 3 and 4.

Prosecution Story in Nutshell:

4. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant Lalla Prasad, son of Jageshwar Pasi (deceased), resident of village Asharafpur, Police Station Nasirabad, District Raebareli, lodged a written report (Ext. Ka-1) stating that there exists an old land dispute between him and Bhullan and others of the village. On 04.03.1993, at around 8:00 PM, the complainant along with his father, Jageshwar (deceased), and companions; Om Prakash (vakil) and Hari Prakash, were returning home from Nasirabad. When they reached ahead of Asharafpur bridge, the accused persons namely, Bhullan (hereinafter referred as A1) son of Shivnath and the son’s of Ram Dulare, namely Surajpal (hereinafter referred as A2), Brijlal (hereinafter referred as A3) and Jagatpal (hereinafter referred as A4), who were sitting there armed with lathis and dandas, stopped them and started hurling abuses. They then assaulted the father of the complainant, Jageshwar as well as Om Prakash with the lathi and danda.

5. Furthermore, when Hari Prakash attempted to intervene, he too was assaulted. On hearing the cries for help, villagers namely Vishram son of Sheetal, Gayadin son of Bechu, Udayraj son of Nattu, etc. reached the spot, whereupon the accused persons fled towards their houses after extending threats to kill. The father of the complainant sustained fractures on his arms and legs alongwith multiple other injuries on his body. He was brought on a charpai (cot) to the police station by the complainant for lodging the report, whereas Om Prakash and Hari Prakash were carried home by their respective family members.

6. On the bases of the written report a FIR was registered under Section 323, Section 325, Section 504, and Section 506 of IPC (Ext. Ka-2) and the G.D. entry of the same was made (Ext. Ka-3). The injuries of Jageshwar, Om Prakash and Hari Prakash were examined by the doctor at the Primary Heath Centre, Jais on 04.03.1993 (Ext. Ka-15, Ext. Ka-16, and Ext. Ka-17) and X-rays of Hari Prakash