The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in witness accounts and investigation cast doubt on the conviction.

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 16-01-2026

None appears on behalf of the appellant. On previous occasion i.e. 08.07.2025 also, no one had appeared on behalf of the appellant. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the informant are present.

2. It is noted that the matter is pending consideration for about 16 years.

3. It has been requested and Ms. Kriti Kumari, learned counsel, has shown her willingness to assist as Amicus Curiae in the present matter.

4. Accordingly, learned counsel Ms.KritiKumari, has been appointed as Amicus Curiae in the present matter.

5. Heard Ms.KritiKumari, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the appellant, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

6. The present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 05.08.2009 and order of sentence dated 12.08.2009 passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, West Champaran, Bettiah in Sessions Trial No. 173 of 2008, arising out of Gaunaha P.S. Case No. 48 of 2007 whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 307 , 324, 452 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years along with fine of Rs. 3,000/- under Section 307 of the IPC and in default of payment of fine, appellant has to undergo further simple imprisonment of three months. The appellant has further been sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years along with fine of Rs. 2,000/- under Section 452 of the IPC and in default of payment of fine, appellant has to undergo further simple imprisonment of two months. However, no sentence order has been passed under Section 324 of the IPC.

7. The informant gave his fardbeyan on 17.10.2007 to A.S.I. of Shikarpur Police Station alleging therein that a week ago his pattidar Quaiyum (appellant) was quarreling with his younger brother/Sheikh Bhutto and informant pacified the said quarrel and on account of said reason, appellant was threatening the informant of dire consequences. It is further alleged that on 17.10.2007 the informant after taking meal was sleeping in a hut near the mosque with his elder brother/ Sheikh Toukid after covering mosquito net and his father Sk. Ejaz Ahmad was sleeping in the adjacent hut and Atikur Rahman was sleeping on verandah. Suddenly at 12.30 AM, informant was attacked by means of sharp edged weapon on his face including nose upon which the informant awoke and flashed torch light and found the appellant, who was standing having khand in his hand. The informant raised alarm upon which his elder brother/ Sk. Toukid/PW-1, father/Sheikh Ezaz Ahmad/PW-2 and Atikur Rahman/PW-3 came. Thereafter, the appellant fled away having khand in his hand but while fleeing away the appellant was identified by all present there in the light of torch. The informant claims that due to previous threat, the appellant assaulted the informant by means of sharp edged khand with intention to kill.

8. On the basis offardbeyangiven by the informant/PW-4,GaunahaP.S. Case No. 48 of 2007 dated 23.10.2007 was registered under Sections 452 , 324 of the IPC and later on Section 307 of the IPC was added. Routine investigation followed. Statement of witnesses came to be recorded and on the completion of investigation, charge sheet has been submitted against the appellant under Section 4