RAM SINGASAN UPADHYAYA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 18.8.1989 passed by Sri S.Rahman, VIth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Arrah, Bhojpur in Sessions Trial No. 70/84/44/88 convicting the appellants, Ram Singhasan Upadhaya and Narendra Upadhaya for the offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing each of them to undergo RI for 3 months and appellant, Kamakhaya Upadhaya has been convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code had sentenced to undergo RI for 6 months.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that on 14.10.1983 at about 8.00 a.m., the informant (PW 1) Dalnath Upadhaya was returning his house from his field. When he reached near his house, he heard the cries of the his wife. He rushed to his house and saw accused, Kamakhaya Upadhaya armed with a bhala and other two accused armed with lathis inside his house. Kamakhaya Upadhaya is alleged to have hurled a bhala blow on the head of Radha Peyari Devi,wife of the informant (PW 2) who fell down with bleeding injuries. It is further alleged that two other accused appellants assaulted her with lathi. It is alleged that there was some dispute in between the parties who are Gotia. The informant's wife (PW 2) came to the police station on the same day at 10.30 a.m. and on her statement, First Information Report was drawn-up. She was referred to Arrah Sadar Hospital where she was examined by doctor Indrajee Bhadu Singh (PW 3). On the same day at about 2.30 p.m. From the injury report of the doctor, it is clear that he found one incised wound on the right side of the forehead 1 /2 x 1/3" bone deep. However, the injury was found simple in nature caused by sharp-edged weapon. The time of injury within 12 hours. This case was investigated by Investigating Officer Jagannath Prasad, SI (PW 4). He inspected the place of occurrence, recorded the statement of PWs and after completing the investigation, submitted the charge-sheet.

(3.) The defence of the case is that due to family dispute they have been implicated in this case and no occurrence as alleged took place.