S.S. Mishra, J. The present Criminal Revision filed under Sections 401 & 397 of Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order dated 07.04.2012 passed by the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge (FTC-I), Phulbani in Criminal Appeal No.08/32 of 2009-10, whereby the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Phulbani in G.R. Case No.454 of 2006 has been confirmed. 2.

The Petitioner was subjected to prosecution in Phiringia P.S. Case No.100 of 2006 registered under Sections 294/341/323/325/34 of the IPC.

3.

The prosecution case is that the husband of the informant, namely, Krushna Sahani, of village Barapada took out his livings by cutting wood from the forest. On 14.12.2006 at about 7.00 A.M., the husband of the informant and one Madava Sahani of same village went together to the forest to cut wood. While they were returning at 6 P.M. near Sripala and Melupara village at Bagha river, the accused persons assaulted them for theft of the goat of Bharat Kanhar by means of Thenga and handle of an axe causing injury on his right eye lid and right hand. Thereafter, the accused persons brought her husband to the Mandap of Sripala village and abused him in filthy languages. When the informant came to know about the incident, she lodged a report before the Phirignia Police Station.

On the basis of such allegation, F.I.R. was lodged and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the petitioner along with other accused persons under Sections 294/341/325/323/34 of IPC. The learned Trial court framed the charges against the petitioner and he was put to trial.

4.

In order to substantiate the case, the prosecution had examined as many as seven witnesses and exhibited five documents. The defence had examined one witness, i.e., D.W.-1, Krupanidhi Kanhar.

5.

The learned Trial Court analyzed the entire evidence on record and found that the Petitioner is guilty of the offences under Sections 341/325/323/34 of the IPC and sentenced him to undergo S.I. for one month and to pay fine of Rs.100/- , in default, to undergo further S.I. for seven days for the offence under Sections 341/34 of the IPC, sentenced to him undergo R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.600/-, in default to undergo further R.I. for six months for the offence under Sections 325/34 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-, in default to undergo further R.I. for a period of one and half month for the offence under Section 323/34 of the IPC and all the sentences were directed to run concurrently by the learned S.D.J.M., Phulbani in G.R. Case No.454 of 2006/T.R. No.157 of 2007. 6. The judgment of conviction and sentence dated 05.02.2009 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Phulbani in G.R. Case No.454 of 2006/T.R.

No.157 of 2007 was called in question by filing Criminal Appeal No.08/32 of 2009-10 before the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC-I), Phulbani by the petitioner.

7.

Having failed in his appeal, the petitioner has challenged the judgment/order of conviction and sentence of both the Courts below in the present Revision Petition before this Court.

8.

Heard Ms. Pragyan Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sasanka Patra, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

9.

Perused the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed against the petitioner and carefully evaluated the evidence on record.

10.

The present petitioner was charged for the alleged offences under Sections 294/341/325/323/34 of the IPC along with other accused persons.

11.

The prosecution examined P.W.3, the injured and P.W.6, the eye-

witness to the occurrence. P.Ws.4 & 5 were the post-occurrence witnesses whereas P.W.1 was the Doctor, who was examined by the prosecution to prove the injury report, X-ray report and X-ray plates, P.W.7 was the I.O. By relying upon the