Girish Chandra Gupta, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against a Judgment dated 15th September, 2008 delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Purulia in Sessions Trial No. 2 of 2007 in connection with Sessions Case No. 433 of 2006 by which the accused Megha @ Meghnath Paramanik, Bapi Paramanik and Hagru Paramanik were acquitted of the charge punishable under section /307 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and the accused Tarani Paramanik, Dharani Paramanik, Santosh Paramanik and Haren Paramanik were held guilty of the offence punishable under sections 304, Part-I/324 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 34 thereof. They were sentenced also by an order dated 15h September, 2008 to rigorous imprisonment for ten years each as also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default of payment to suffer further additional rigorous imprisonment for one year each for the offence punishable under section 304, Part-I of the Indian Penal Code read with section 34 thereof. They were also punished and sentenced to imprisonment for two years each for the offence punishable under section 324 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences were, however. directed to run concurrently.
(2.) The facts and circumstances of the case briefly stated are as follows : The convicts are the sons of Buddheswar Paramanik. The victims are the sons of Anil Paramanik. Both Anil and Buddheswar were full brothers, son of late Rash Behari Paramanik. The victims and the appellants had their ancestral house at plot No. 475 consisting of 35 decimals of land. A portion of that piece of land consisting of a room and a boundary wall belonged to the victims and the rest of it belonged to the appellants. The boundary wall belonging to the victims got demolished. The victim, Mathur and his two brothers, namely, Nayan and Narayan on 7th September. 2006 at about 6.30 a.m. in the morning went to the plot No. 475 for the purpose of arranging the bricks of the demolished wall and stacking them properly. All the three brothers were engaged in the above work when the appellants alongwith the rest of the accused persons armed with deadly weapons arrived at the place of occurrence : started an altercation and thereafter they pounced upon them. Mathur and Narayan were married persons. Their mother, Fani Paramanik hearing the news rushed to the place of occurrence accompanied by her daughters-in-law. The mother naturally tried to protect her sons. She in the process was also assaulted. Three sons and the mother were thus assaulted. They were shifted to the Local Public Health Centre. From there they were shifted to Purulia Sadar Hospital. Nayan died in the transit. Mathur survived after a prolonged treatment at Ranchi and thereafter at Appello Nursing Home. The rest of the two victims recovered after their treatment both at the Public Health Centre and the Sadar Hospital. It is in these facts that the F.I.R. was lodged contemporaneously by the victim, Mathur through his wife. The police after registering the case started investigation. On the basis of the statement made by the accused Tarani, offending weapons were recovered from a Well. Ultimately all the seven accused persons were charge-sheeted but the learned Trial Court acquitted three of them only on the basis that the victims before the doctor did not disclose the names of the three accused persons. It Is on this basis that Megha, Bapi and Hagru were acquitted although they were all F.I.R. named accused persons and had been charged under section 302/307 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.
(3.) Mr. Bera, learned advocate appearing for the appellants made the following submissions:- (a) The learned Trial Court has found that the accused Megha. Bapi and Hagru were into involved in this matter and they, therefore. have been acquitted. Mr. Bera submitted that these three persons were falsely implicated in order to attract the provision of section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. (b) The victims did not disclose either in the F.I.R. or in their respective evidence as to what weapon was used by the individual accused persons. (c) P.W. 3, Fani Paramanik during her evidence deposed that she did not see the accused Tarani at the place of occurrence. (d) The allegedly offending weapons recovered by the Investigating Officer were never sent for chemical analysis to the F.S.L. (e) The victims in their deposition deposed that the local people had assembled at the place of occurrence but during the trial those local people were not cited as the witnesses except for the P.Ws. 6 and 7 who eventually turned hostile. Mr. Bera, therefore, submitted that the case of the prosecution has not been proved and the appellants are entitled to an outright acquittal.;