- (1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the appellants and learned Counsel for the state.
(2.) The instant appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.9.2001 passed by Sri Sita Ram Mahto, 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Seraikella in Sessions Trial No. 261 of 1992 by which judgment all the appellants were convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years Under Section 148 of the I.P.C and further, they were convicted and sentenced to undergo S.I. For 1 year Under Section 323 of the I.P.C. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. It is submitted by learned Counsel for the appellants that informant and appellants, both, are co-villagers and there was some dispute as the informant's wife was stopped from doing delivery case in their family. Hence, this occurrence took place for which the appellants have sufficiently been punished, since, they have undergone a long drawn trial and appeal from 1990. They have also remained in custody for sometime. The entire family members have been made accused and the prosecution case has not been supported by any of the independent witnesses of the village. Only the family members have supported the prosecution case. In that view of the matter, the conviction of the appellants are bad in law and fit to be set aside.
(3.) On the other hand, learned Counsel for the state has supported the prosecution case and stated that the nature of the occurrence is such that all of the accused have entered the house of the informant and assaulted him and as such the family members who have been examined are all natural witnesses and trial court has rightly relied upon them and convicted the appellants Under Section 323 and 148 of the I.P.C.;