D.P.SINGH, J. - (1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the judgment and order dated
(2.) 9.2002 passed by 13th Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 208 of 1994 whereby and whereunder appellant Samsuddin Ansari stands convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for three years and appellant Nos. 2 to 4 stand convicted for the offence under Sec. 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for one year. 2 Brief facts leading to this appeal are that in the afternoon of 28.8.1993, one Islam Ansari was trying to get rain water in his paddy fields by diverting such water from village road towards his fields situated by the side of the paddy fields of the appellants. According to informants Rahman Ansari, his brother has put an obstruction on Kulhi, the village road so that rain water flowing towards south may be diverted in his paddy fields, when the appellants arrived there and objected why he was trying to get water diverted towards his fields as the appellants wanted the same water for his paddy fields. During this objection, appellants started assaulting his brother, in which appellant Samsuddin Ansari gave a blow with spade in his hand resulting in grievous injury on him and other appellants assaulted his brother with lathi rod and fist. Villagers arrived and rescued Islam Ansari from further assault. The matter was brought to the knowledge of the police, on the basis of which, Nirsa Police Station Case No. 166 of 1993 under Sections 341, 323 and 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered. The police submitted charge -sheet after completion of investigation against the four persons under Sections 341, 323, 324 and 307/24 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial Court framed charge against the four appellants on January 24, 1997 under Sec. 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code only. The appellants pleaded not guilty. The learned trial Court after considering the materials on records found and held appellant Samsuddin Ansari guilty for the offence under Sec. 324 of the Indian Penal Code and other appellants under Sec. 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them separately as stated above.
(3.) THE present appeal has been preferred mainly on the grounds that the learned trial Court has accepted the prosecution version without evaluating the contradictions available in the statements of different witnesses. Mr. Jai Prakash, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants, submitted that the injuries found on Islam Ansari were not sufficient to hold that charges under Sections 324 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code made out. According to him, the incident took place at the spur of moment without having any intention and now parties are living in peace. Learned Counsel further submitted that if the conviction is maintained, bitterness may further crop up between the parties. According to learned Counsel, all the injuries were found simple in nature and such incidents are petty in nature for which the appellants have already suffered trial and harassment for nearly fourteen years. Learned Counsel further pointed out that the very genesis of the occurrence is doubtful, as the witnesses are not claiming to have seen the incident. Therefore, in absence of the investigating officer, the appellants deserve to be acquitted. ;