Joymalya Bagchi, J. - (1.) The appeal is directed against the judgement and order dated 30.08.2000 passed by learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Cooch Behar in Session Trial No. 2(6) of 1997 arising out of Dinhata Police Station Case No. 294 of 1992 convicting the appellants for commission of offence punishable under Sections 148/457/326/307/149 of the Indian Penal Code and directing that the appellant no. 2 Khagendra Barman shall suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 5 months more for offence under Section 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code and the appellant nos. 1,3 and 4 are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years each and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each in default to suffer simple imprisonment of 5 months each for offence under Sections 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code. No separate sentence was awarded for the conviction of the appellants for the other offences.
(2.) The prosecution case as alleged against the appellants is to the effect that on 25th September, 1992 the de facto complainant was sleeping in his room after taking his dinner. At that time his elder brother Hiranna @ Shyam Barman and his sister-in-law Sabitri Barman were sleeping in the northern side room of the house. At about 2A.M. in the night he woke up on hearing sound of someone pushing the door. When he came out of the room he found four persons with ballam, dagger etc. in their hands standing in front of the room of his elder brother. He found that the said persons entered the room and his brother was groaning in his room and he saw a ballam had been pushed into the abdomen of his elder brother and blood was coming out of the wound. He attacked the accused persons whereupon they fled away. Thereafter his elder brother pulled out the ballam from his stomach. There was a lantern burning inside the room. He could recognise the appellants in the light of the lantern. He lodged written complaint at the police station resulting in registration of Dinhata Police Station Case No. 294 of 1992 under Sections 148/457/326/149 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellants and subsequently Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code was added to the array of offences. In conclusion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellants under Sections 147/148/149/457/326/307 of the Indian Penal Code. Case was committed to the Court of Sessions and transferred to the Court of Assistant Sessions Judge, Cooch Behar for trial and disposal. Charges were framed from under Sections 148/457/326 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellants and other accused persons. The appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In the course of trial, prosecution examined 12 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. The defence of the appellants was one of innocence and false implication. In conclusion of trial, the learned trial judge by judgement and order dated 30th August, 2000 convicted and sentenced the appellants, as aforesaid.
(3.) Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses do not establish the case beyond reasonable doubt. There are contradictions in the evidence of P.W. 8 and his ocular version is not supported by the medical evidence particularly with regard to the role of the appellants no. 1, 3 and 4. He, accordingly, prayed for acquittal.;