(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.
(2.) THE appellant has been convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 148, 323 and 447 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years for offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, one year for offence under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code, three months for offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and three months for offence under Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code. However, it has been ordered that all the sentences shall run concurrently.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant, however, contended that taking into consideration the allegation and the evidence adduced, the medical evidence does not suggest even accepted on the face value that the assault was made with intention to kill and the injury on the persons of the injured either taken singly even the cumulative effect does not make out a case for offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. It has further been contended that a counter case has been filed bearing Bhagwan Bazar P.S. Case No. 54 of 1985 with regard to the occurrence at same time and place and the fardbeyan was recorded in the hospital and the injury was found on the person of Shivnath Rai, Jagdish Rai and Ram Ayodhaya Rai who are the accused in this case and in the said case the charge-sheet was submitted and the fardbeyan, FIR, the injury report and the charge-sheet have been proved as Exts. A, B, C and D in this case and hence contended that even if the prosecution case is accepted then the injury on the persons of the accused person having not been explained by the prosecution, it can well be inferred that the prosecution has not come with the clean hand and the genesis of the occurrence is otherwise and prosecution has not explained the injury on the accused persons which is contemporaneous to the alleged occurrence.