- (1.) ACCUSED appellants Jhandu, Zakir and Tazir have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 24.08.2002 by which they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years after convicting them for the offence punishable under Section 308/34 IPC.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that, one Shakir Ali lodged an FIR on 16.07.1995 to the effect that at about 8.00AM the accused appellants started raising a wall by forcefully closing the open toilet (sandas) of the complainant. When the complainant's brother Idris objected to it, the accused appellants started beating to him with lathi, danda and bricks. In result, Idris fell unconscious and the accused fled away after hurling abuse and extending threat to kill. After hearing hue and cry Ansar Hussain, Mohd. Umar and other co-villagers reached at the scene. Injured was immediately admitted in Suratganj Hospital,? He was referred to the District Hospital, Barabanki. Hence, FIR was lodged in Police Station Mohammadpur Khala, District Barabanki. The injured was medically examined/treated. The case was registered under Crime No.85 of 1995. After conclusion of investigation, charge sheet dated 12.09.1995 was submitted. The learned Magistrate took cognizance and committed the accused for trial to the Court of Sessions which was registered as Sessions Trial No.366 of 1997. The learned Trial Court framed charges against the accused appellants on 5.1.1999 for the offence punishable under Section 308/34 IPC, to which they denied and claimed trial.
(3.) THE prosecution examined Shakir Ali as PW1, Ansar Hussain as PW2, Idris as PW3, Dr. S.K. Tandon as PW4, HC Dashrath Maurya as PW5, Dr. C.C. Dubey as PW6, Dr. M.K. Kanchan as PW7 and Dr. Pramod Nautial as PW8. There is documentary evidence as well. The defence did not lead any evidence but filed documents (sale deed and compromise deed). After conclusion of trial, learned Trial Court examined accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and reached to the conclusion that the prosecution has got success in proving guilt of the accused appellant and after convicting the accused appellant, sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. Hence, this appeal has been preferred.;