- (1.) R. A. Misra, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties and have through the record.
(2.) THE accused appellants Jaswant and Radhey Lal have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 10-2-1982 passed by I Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Barabanki convicting them under Section 325 read with Section 34, I. P. C. and sentencing each one of them to undergo R. I. for a period of 3 years, for having assaulted Kali Charan and Bachchoo Lal and further convicting and sentencing the accused-appellant Radhey Lal under Section 323, I. P. C. and sentencing him to undergo R. I. for a period of 3 months for having caused hurt to Kali Charan with the directions that both the sentences shall run concurrently. The facts which have given rise to this appeal are briefly given as below :-Kali Charan P. W. 1 found she-buffalo of Jaswant grazing and damaging his crop at about 8. 00am. on 28-8-1977 in village Pir Nagar, Hamlet of Singtara, P. S. Kursi, district Barabanki. While he was driving away the cattle from the field the accused Jaswant along with his brother Radhey accused reached there armed with lathi and danda. The accused abused Kali Charan whereupon the latter asked them not to do so. The accused then dealt lathi and danda blows on the person of Kali Charan and his brother. Cries raised by the victims attracted Puttoo, Baboo, Munna, P. W. 2 who reached the scene of occurrence. Kali Charan submitted a written report at 1. 50 p. m. the same day at the Police Station. Investigating Officer investigated the case and submitted the charge-sheet. Accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined Kali Charan, P. W. 1. Munna, P. W. 2 Bachchoo Lal, P. W. 4 as witnesses of fact. Ram Lakhan, P. W. 3 is the constable who has prepared that F. I. R. and other police papers. Deo Narain Dwivedi, P. W. 5 has proved the injury register and Dr. K. M. Lal, P. W. 6 has proved the injuries found on the person of Bachchoo Lal and Kali Charan. Ram Pher Prasad Rawat, P. W. 7 is the Investigating Officer. The accused have not examined any witness in defence. The learned Sessions Judge on consideration of the entire evidence arrived at the conclusion that the charge under Section 308, I. P. C. is not proved. He has, therefore, acquitted the accused for the same but instead has found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 325/34 and one of them under Section 323, I. P. C. He has consequently convicted and sentenced them. They have felt aggrieved and come up in appeal. Kali Charan, P. W. 1 is the informant as well as the victim. He has opened the prosecution case by narrating the prosecution story which has been given in the opening of this judgment. He has alleged to have lodged the F. I. R. the same day naming the accused. It is proved from the evidence that the F. I. R. has been pre-emptly lodged by Kali Charan. F. I. R. fully corro borates the prosecution story. Dr. K. M. Lal is the Medical Officer who has examined Kali Charan at 2. 30 p. m. on 28-8-1987 and found one contusion on his beck, 11. 5cm. X 2cm. on right scapula bone. In the opinion of the medical expert the injury was simple in nature. Kali Charan has deposed that it is the accused Radhey who has caused this injury on his person. Bachchoo Lal, P. W. 4 is the other injured witness. He has been examined by Dr. K. M. Lal who has found as many as 11 injuries on his person. He has further deposed that injury numbers 1 and 8 of Bachchoo Lal are grievous in nature. Then the medical evidence fully corroborates the prosecution story.
(3.) MUNNA, P. W. 2 is a labourer who was going to transplant paddy in the village of Bachchoo Lal. He swears to have seen the occurrence wherein the accused caused lathi and danda injuries to Kali Charan and Bachchoo Lal. He has been fully cross-examined but nothing has been pointed out which may go to discredit his testimony. Learned Judge who had the advantage of watch ing the demeanour of the witnesses, has believed him and I see no reason to disagree with the conclusion arrived at by him. Learned Counsel for the appellant has pointed out some minor con tradictions in the F. I. R. and prosecution story as deposed by witnesses of fact. Learned Sessions Judge has in his judgment given good reasons for not attaching any importance to those minor contradictions. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the appellants' version regarding these contradic tions and in my judgment the contradictions do not indicate the mala fides of the prosecution and cannot be said to have occurred in an attempt in anyway for improving the prosecution story. Such contradiction are natural and inspire confidence in the genuineness of the F. I. R. and truthfulness of the witnesses. Learned Judge has rightly refused to disbelieve the witnesses of fact on account of these minor contradictions.;