Conviction requires proof beyond reasonable doubt; insufficient evidence leads to acquittal.

1. The present criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellants under S.374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, dated 27.11.1998, delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narsinghpur, in Sessions Trial No.59/1995, whereby appellant no.1 Radheshyam has been found guilty for commission of offence punishable under S.326 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC ') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.100/-, with default stipulation and all appellants Radheshyam, Ramji, Hotram and Khet Singh have also been found guilty for commission of offence punishable under S.325 or 325/34 of and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each and to pay fine of Rs.100/- each, with default stipulations.

2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that, on 25.06.1985 at about 03:30 pm near Village Mohad under the jurisdiction of Police Station Kareli, District Narsinghpur appellant no.1 Radheshyam with other appellants sharing common intention for causing hurt to complainant Purshottam (PW - 4) with the aid of wooden sticks, have attacked on him causing injuries of serious nature, when Amar Singh (PW - 2) has intervened then the appellant Radheshyam has also inflicted injuries to him in his abdomen by means of knife by which Amar Singh (PW - 2) sustained serious injuries. Both the injured victims have been taken to the hospital. Dehati Nalishi has been recorded and offence has been registered. During the course of medical examination injury of Amar Singh (PW - 2) was found to be serious and fatal to life and injury of Purshottam (PW - 4) was also found to be grievous. The statements of complainant Purshottam (PW - 4), injured Amar Singh (PW - 2) and other witnesses have been recorded, on the basis of which Crime No.165/1985 under S.324 read with S.34 of IPC has been registered. After medical examination of the injured persons, S.325 and S.326 of read with S.34 of have been added in the already registered crime. After completion of investigation, the charge - sheet has been filed against appellants in the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Narsinghpur. The learned trial Court framed the charges under S.307/34 and 325 of against the appellants. The appellants abjured their guilt and pleaded for trial. Their defence was that they are innocent and has been falsely implicated. They have also examined Ramdeen (DW - 1) and Sudama Prasad (DW - 2) in their defence. The learned trial Court after analyzing the testimony of complainant Purshottam (PW - 4) and considering the corroborative evidence of Amar Singh (PW - 2), Roshanlal (PW - 5) and medical witnesses Dr. S.K. Maheshwari (PW - 1), Dr. C.S. Chouhan (PW - 3), Investigating Officer A.S.I. Narmada Prasad Sharma (PW - 6) and Dr. K.K. Sahu (PW - 7), convicted and sentenced the appellants as mentioned herein above.

3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence appellants have filed this appeal on the ground that the findings of the trial Court are contrary to law. The testimony of only Purshottam (PW - 4) regarding such incident have been accepted against the appellants, but his version is not supported by other injured witness Amar Singh (PW - 2). It is also submitted that the other witnesses, who were claimed to be present at the scene of occurrence have also not supported the case of prosecution. There is old rivalry between complainant Purshottam (PW - 4) and appellants. The marriage of the complainant Purshottam (PW - 4) was solemnized with Kala Bai, who is sister of appellant Ramji and n