D.P.SINGH, J. - (1.) THIS appeal has been preferred by the complainant Vijay Mandal against the judgment and order dated 30.4.1992 by which the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Godda has acquitted the respondents from charges under Sections 307/324/325/149 of the Indian Penal Code in Sessions Case No. 31 of 1987.
(2.) THIS appeal has been preferred mainly on the grounds that the learned trial Court has not considered the ocular evidence and discarded the consistent statements of injured persons. According to this memo of appeal, the trial Court has further failed to appreciate that the injured persons were hospitalised for long period. This appeal was admitted on 19.8.1992 with notice to the respondents, who have appeared before the trial Court and executed bonds. However, when the appeal was called for final disposal, no one appeared on behalf of the appellant. Learned A.P.P. appeared for the State and the respondents were also present through their counsel, Mr. Rajeeva Sharma.
(3.) LEARNED A.P.P. for the State submitted that the consistent evidence of PWs 1 to 4 supports the prosecution case. According to him, the injury reports were proved by PW 5 showing the injuries on four persons caused by sharp cutting weapons. Therefore, the factum of assault has been proved beyond doubts.;