R.K.MERATHIA, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence both dated 8.6.1992, passed by Shri D.N. Barai, 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Palamau in Sessions Trial No. 78 of 1987, convicting the appellants under Sections 307, 325 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and acquitting them under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code and convicting them under Sections 307, 325 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also to pay a total fine of Rs. 4,500/ - each on all counts to be paid to the victims.
(2.) THE FIR in question was lodged on 24.10.1984 stating inter alia; that the informant, Abhimanya Dhar Dubey (PW 1 now deceased) filed a petition before the SDO against the appellant for not allowing him to irrigate his fields from Ahar (Pond). On 24.10.1984. the Circle Officer visited the place of occurrence to enquire into the said petition and after he returned, the informant along with his wife (PW 4) and son (PW 2) went to his khalihan for paying wages to the labourers. While they were returning home and they reached near the door of the appellants, both the appellants abused them and started assaulting the informant. When PWs 2 and 4 tried to save the informant, they were also assaulted. Appellant No. 2 Girja Shankar snatched writ watch from PW 2. On hearing "hulla", PWs 7 and 8 reached there and witnessed the occurrence. PWs 1, 2 and 4 were sent to hospital by the co -villagers. The doctor, Ranjan Kumar (PW 3) examined them and found injuries on PWs 1,2. and 4. PW 7 has been declared hostile and PW 8 has been tendered. From the evidence of injured witness PWs 1, 2 and 4 and the medical evidence of two doctors PWs 3 and 5, it is clear that all the injuries on PWs 1, 2 and 4 were by lathi on legs and hands due to the dispute between the parties regarding the irrigation of their lands. Both the legs and right forearm of PW 1 were fractured. Apart from these, three grievous injuries he had two simple injuries. PW 2 had a grievous injury of elbow fracture and 12 simple injuries. P.W4 had two simple injuries.
(3.) THE question is whether there was intention to kill the informant or not. Mr. Tripathy submitted that admittedly, the injuries were caused when the informant party reached near the door of the appellants; the injuries were caused by latht the injuries were not on the vital parts of the body.;