- (1.) This appeal is directed against the order and judgment dated 29th September, 1997 passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, 1st Court Contai convicting the accused appellant herein under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code to suffer rigorous imprisonment for eight years and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-. In default, to suffer S. I. for a further period of two months.
(2.) The facts of the instant case is as follows: The accused appellant along with eight other accused persons armed with deadly weapons trespassed into the dwelling house of the defacto-complainant and demolished the boundary wall of the said dwelling house. On being resisted by P.W.6, the accused appellant inflicted a knife injury on the left chest of the defacto-complainant's husband, Dhiren Mondal (P.W.6). The accused persons also took away a trunk from their house containing cash and gold earring. An FIR was filed by the defacto-complainant on 31st August, 1994, being Egra P. S. Case No.86/94 and on basis of such complaint, investigation was initiated. As a result of such investigation, the accused person along with eight other persons were arrested on 17th Novermber, 1995. The investigation resulted in framing of charges which when read out and explained to the accused appellant and the other accused persons the said persons pleaded not guilty and sought for trial. Trial was initiated and witnesses examined. Documents were also exhibited and on appreciation of evidence, both oral and written, the trial court convicted the accused appellant to suffer rigorous imprisonment for eight years and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to suffer S. I. for a further period of two months. The sentences were to run concurrently. It is from this order and judgment dated 29th September, 1997 that this appeal has been filed.
(3.) Prior to passing of the judgment but after completion of evidence, the charge was altered by order dated 23rd September, 1997 and the initial charges framed was altered to a charge framed under section 307 IPC. Based on the said altered charge, the judgment and order of conviction passed has been challenged in this appeal.;