ORDER

1. The appellants have filed present criminal appeal under section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (in short” Cr.P.C”) against the impugned order and judgment dated 22.9.1998 passed in ST no. 149/1998, wherby the both the appellants have been convicted under section 3 of the Explosive Substance Act read with section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, further undergo two months rigorous imprisonment.

2. Fact of the case in brief is that on 14.11.1997 at about 10-11 pm, both the appellants came to the house of the complainant Kamleshwar and started abusing him in filthy language. The complainant objected to do so. They told the complainant why his son lodged FTR against them, they would kill him. Thereafter, the complainant ran at his house and closed the door of the house. Thereafter, the appellant Om took out bomb from his pocket and threw it at the house of the complainant, which fell on the wall of the house, due to which, blast occurred. On the next day, the complainant lodged FIR at police station -Banganga, Indore, During investigation, the Investigating Officer seized some parts of the explosive substance from the spot. Spot map was also prepared by him vide Ex.-P/2 and after sanction of District Magistrate, Indore, charge-sheet was filed before the trial court. The trial Court framed the charges under sections 294, 506(part-II) of IPC and sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act against both the appellants/accued. The appellants abjured their guilt and took a plea that they are innocent. They were not present on the spot at the time of the incident. They were implicated in the said offence due to previous enmity. The prosecution examined as many as eight witneness to prove their case, however, no witness had been examined by the defence.

3. The trial Court, after due consideration of the evidence available on record, acquitted the appellants/accused from the charges under sections 294, 506(part-II) of IPC, but convicted them under section 3 of the Explosive Substances Act readwith section 34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo five years R.I with fine of Rs. 500/- each with default stipulation.

4. The appellants have preferred present appeal on several grounds that learned Court below has failed to appreciate the facts and circumstances of the case reasonably and properly. The trial Court has grossly erred in relying upon the version of prosecution witnesses. The trial court has not considered material omission and contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses and discarded the defence version. The judgment passed by the trial Court is neither legal, nor proper and correct. Under these circumstances, present appeal be allowed and the judgment of conviction be set aside by acquitting the appellants from all the charges.

5. Per-contra, learned GA for the respondent/State has opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellants and prays for dismissal of present appeal by submitting that the trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellants and the sentence in question is just and proper, therefore, no need to interfere in the findings of the trial Court.

6. Heard learned counsel for both the parteis at length and perused the records as well as evidence available on record.

7. Complainant Kamleshwar Mishra (PW-4) has stated in his statement that at the time of the incident, between 10-11 pm, accused persons came to his hosue and told that his son along with deshi lodged FIR against them and they would kill him. Thereafter, accused Om took out something from his pocket. The complainant closed the door of his house, but the accused Om threw bomb at his house, which fell on the tark of the door, due to which, explosion occurred and some bullets spread up. He lodged FIR (Ex-P/3) at police station – Banganga, Indore. After that, the police officials came to his home and recovered some bullet