MD.MUMTAZ KHAN, J. - (1.) The Subject matter of challenge is the judgement, order of conviction and sentence dated March 21, 2000 passed by the Ld. Assistant Sessions Judge, Additional Court, Hooghly, in Sessions Trial Case No. 27 of 1997. By virtue of the impugned judgment appellants were convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 8 years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/ - each in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as I.P.C.) and to also suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year each for the offence punishable under Section 341 of the I.P.C. with a direction that both the sentences will run concurrently with usual set off and with a further direction that if the fine amount is realised the same will go to the victim. The backdrop of the appeal is discussed below in a nutshell: - On December 23, 1993 at 10.55 hours, P.W.1 lodged a written complaint before the Officer -in -Charge, Chinsurah P.S. stating therein that on December 22, 1993 around 9.00 p.m. while his brother Tarak Roy (P.W.5) was returning home on a cycle after closing his shop at Khadinamore and after crossing beneath the railway bridge when he reached near a big Jamrul tree then Sunu Sarkar (appellant No. 2), Suresh Sankar and Kailash Singh alias Babu (appellant No. 1) in collusion and conspiracy with Shib Narayan Das(appellant No. 3) detained him and thereafter Sunu Sarkar and Kailash Singh by holding pistol on his back asked him to proceed towards nearby bush and when his brother refused and tried to run away towards home they fired at him from behind causing bleeding injury. But in spite of that injury his brother ran towards home and reached near the courtyard of Jagannath Banerjee. In the meantime hearing the sound of firing Anjali Banerjee (P.W.3) and Mina Mondal (P.W.4) came out and saw his brother and came to his help. Hearing the sound of firing he and his uncle Ram Chandra Roy also came out from the house and found his brother sustained bleeding injuries and immediately rushed him to Chinsurah Sadar Hospital where his brother was admitted in critical condition.
(2.) On the basis of the above written complaint, a Chinsurah P.S. Case No. 338 dated December 23, 1993 was started against the appellants and one Suresh Sankar under Section 341/326/307/114 IPC and 25/27 Arms Act. and the case was endorsed to P.W.8 for investigation who then investigated the same and on completion of investigation submitted charge sheet being No. 190 dated December 31, 1994 against the appellants under Section 341/326/307/114 IPC and 25/27 Arms Act with a prayer for discharge of accused Suresh Sankar as being fictitious person which was allowed.
(3.) Charges were framed on November 23, 1998 against the appellants under Section 341/307 IPC and when the appellants denied their involvement in the crime, trial commenced. Prosecution examined 11 (eleven) witnesses and also produced and proved certain documents and articles and, thereafter, on completion of trial and after examination of the appellants under Section 313 Cr.P.C. learned court below passed the impugned judgment.;