The testimony of an injured witness carries high evidentiary value as they bear the imprint of the occurrence. Minor testimonial discrepancies and procedural investigation lapses, such as failure to seize weapons, do not invalidate a conviction if the prosecution's core case is established by reliable evidence and medical corroboration.

JUDGMENT :

Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.

1. The instant revisional application has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment and order dated 28.03.2012 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court at Bankura in Criminal Appeal No. 21 of 2010 thereby affirming the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31.03.2010 passed by the Learned Assistant Sessions Judge at Bankura in Sessions Case No. 13(3) of 2007 in connection with Sessions Trial No. 06(7) of 2007, arising out of Onda Police Station Case No. 30 of 2006 dated 11.05.2006 thereby affirming the judgment and convicting the petitioners no. 1 to 5 herein under Sections 148/323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months each for the offence punishable under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months each for the offence punishable under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and convicting the petitioners no. 6 to 8 under Sections 148/325 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months each for the offence punishable under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and further sentencing them to suffer simple imprisonment for one year each and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months each for the offence punishable under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. The petitioner underwent trial in Sessions Case No.13(3) of 2007 in connection with Sessions Trial No. 06(7) of 2007, which was initiated on the basis of a written complaint lodged to the Officer-in-Charge of Onda Police Station by one Ali Hossain Mondal, inter alia, alleging as follows:-

"that on 11.05.06 at about 8:00 Hrs the petitioners above named being armed with Lathi, Tangi etc attacked the brothers of the defacto complainant as a result of which they suffered several serious bodily injuries; that the petitioners took away stationery goods from the shop of the defacto complainant and one Akbar Ali Mondal."

3. The petitioner stated the aforesaid complaint resulted in registration of Onda Police Station Case No. 30 of 2006 dated 11.05.06 under Sections 147/148/149/323/326/307/379/506 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. After completion of investigation, the investigating agency submitted charge sheet in the instant case against the petitioners under Sections 147/148/149/ 323/326/ 307/ 379/506 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. Charge was framed against the petitioners under Sections 148/149/326/307 of the Indian Penal Code to which the petitioners pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. The prosecution in order to establish its case examined as many as 17 witnesses and exhibited certain documents.

7. The Learned Advocate representing the petitioners submitted as follows:-

i. “It is trite law that the conviction given under Sections 323/325/148 of the Indian Penal Code must satisfy the essentials wher