Pradeep Kumar, J. - (1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the Appellants and the learned Counsel for the state.
(2.) THE instant appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.11.2002 passed in S.T. No. 153 of 1997 by Shri R.K. Srivastava, Additional Sessions Judge, FTC -3rd Bokaro, by which judgment he found the Appellant No. 1(Hanif Ansari) guilty under Section 148 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced him to R.I. for two years under Section 324 of Indian Penal Code and R.I. for two years under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and directed that both sentences will run concurrently and the Appellant Nos. 2 to 8 found guilty under Sections 147 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and they are released on probation on executing a bond of Rs. 10,000/ - with one sureties for a period of one year as provided under Section 4(1) of the Probation of Offender Act, 1958. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Appellants that the Appellants and the informant both are gotias and due to land disputes this occurrence took place. Moreover, since the prosecution case failed to examine the doctor and proved no injury report that what type of injury suffered by the informant, P.W.3 Sikander Ansari where the injuries were caused by iron rod or by something else. In absence of any medical evidence, conviction of the Appellant Hanif Ansari under Sections 324 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code is bad in law and fit to be set aside.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned Counsel for the State opposed the prayer but admitted that there is no medical injury proved by any doctor.;