PRASAD, J. - (1.) THE present appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 28. 6. 1991 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalore in Criminal Case No. 149/91 whereby the learned Magistrate has acquitted the accused respondents for offences punishable under Sections 341, 325, and 323 I. P. C.
(2.) THE brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 6. 1. 1988 at 9. 45 A. M. one Veera Ram filed an oral first information report that today at 9-9. 30 A. M. when Ranchoda was carrying on sand in bullock cart and reached in front of his house, Chuniya and Ganesha armed with lathis came over there and Chuniya inflicted lathi blow on the face and Ganesha inflicted lathi blow on the head of Ranchhoda. Till that time Ranchhoda stepped down from the cart. THEreafter Ranchhoda and Chuniya struggled with each other. He and his father Soma intervened and separated them. THE left ear's border layer of Ranchhoda broken and he lost his golden Murki which was taken over by the accused. Two teeth of Ranchhoda were broken and he was also caused injury on the head. At the time of lodging the report Ranchhoda was also accompanying the first informant. On this report the police registered a case and the investigation commenced. After investigation the police filed challan against the accused Chuniya and Ganesha under Sections 341,323, and 325 I. P. C. The accused were charged under the aforesaid sections and they denied the charge and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case examined 10 witnesses. The accused was also examined under Section 313 Cr. P. C. They stated in their statement that due to enmity and relationship the witnesses were giving evidence against them. As a matter of fact Ranchhoda came to their house and he has started beating Chuniya when Ganesha intervened he was also beaten. This report has been lodged as a counter blast to the report filed by the accused. The accused also examined two witnesses in defence. After trial the learned trial court acquitted the accused. Hence this appeal was filed by the State. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that on the basis of the statements of the prosecution witnesses the prosecution has been able to establish its case. However, the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused on minor discripancies in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. The medical report clearly establishes that 6 injuries were caused to Ranchhoda, out of which injury No. 2 was grievous in nature. Thus, the accused respondents have committed the offence under Section 341, 323 and 325 I. P. C.
(3.) THE learned counsel for the accused respondents has supported the judgment of the learned trial court and submitted that there is no illegality in the judgment of the learned trial court. THE learned trial court has rightly acquitted the accused respondents after appreciating the material on record. I have considered the rival submissions and have also perused the record. I am also in agreement with the view taken by the learned trial court. Learned trial court has given cogent reasons for acquitting the accused respondents. After discussing the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution the learned trial court came to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to establish beyond doubt that which accused caused which injury to the victim. The victim himself has failed to disclose as to which injury was caused by which accused so also the witness Bhopa P. W. 5 and P. W. 8 Soma. So far as the witness P. W. 1 Veera Ram is concerned, in his statement before the court has disclosed a different story from the one mentioned in the first information report. Learned trial court opined that injuries were also caused to the accused respondents at the same time and the prosecution has not furnished any plausible explanation for the injuries caused to the accused. Further no charge with aid of Section 34 I. P. C. was framed against the accused respondents. Therefore, learned trial Court has rightly acquitted the accused respondents from the charges levelled against them. ;