JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal has been preferred against the judgment of Sri Sankatha Rai, Additional Sessions Judge Sirohi dated 17-3-1976 by which he acquitted the accused-respondent Narsing Lal under Sections 307 324 and 323, Indian Penal Code. The facts of the case giving rise to this appeal may be summarised thus. 2. In the morning of April 3, 1975, Lal Singh PW 2 went to the well of the accused to take bath along with his brother-in-law Sohan Singh. There was long standing enmity between the families of the accused and Lal Singh PW 2. The accused hurled abuses and forcibly turned out Lal Singh therefrom. On return from the well, he narrated the story of his insult to other members of his family. At about 7.30 p.m. the same day, when he was returning from his well to his house, Kesar Singh PW 10, uncle of Lal Singh PW 2 enquired from the accused for his said conduct. The accused stopped his bullock cart and started belabouring Kesar Singh PW 10 from the "Jatru" of his cart. He ran his bullock cart on the body of Kesar singh after he fell down on the ground. Mohan Singh PW 7 brother of Lal Singh PW 2 was also injured when he intervened. Kesar Singh became unconscious due to injuries received by him. The injured Kesar Singh was immediately shifted to Government hospital, Takhatgarh. Dr. Jaswant Singh Bhandari PW 8 attended him and he sent his memo Ex. P 1O to the Station House Officer, Takhatgarh, intimating that Kesar Singh PW10 had been admitied in the hospital in injured condition. On its receipt, the SHO, Takhatgarh, Swaroop Narain, PW 11 recorded the FIR Ex. P 10-A on the basis of the said memo, came to the hospital and commenced investigation After investigation, a challan under Sections 307, 223, 324 and 325, Indian Penal Code was filed against the accused in the Court of the Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Bali who committed the accused to the Additional Sessions Judge, Sirohi. 3. The Additional Sessions Judge, Sirohi framed charges under Sections 323, 224 and 307, Indian Penal Code against the accused. He did not plead guilty & claimed trial. 3. The Additional Sessions Judge, Sirohi framed charges under Sections 323, 224 and 307, Indian Penal Code against the accused. He did not plead guilty & claimed trial. The prosecution examined injured Mohan singh PW7 & Kesar Singh PW 12, Badna PW 1, Lalsingh PW2, Jethusingh PW as eye-witnesses Ghisu PW 3, Khinv Singh PW 4 and Vardishanker PW 6 who immediately came to the place of occurrence after the occurrence, Dr. Jaswant Singh Bhimdari PW 8 who examined the injured Kesar Singh PW 10 Mohan Singh PW 7 and the accused Narsing Lal, Radiologist Dr. Rameshchandra Kinkar PW 9 who took the X-ray of the fractured ribs of Kesar Singh PW 10 and the Investigating Officer Swaroop Narain PW 11. The accused admits in his statement recorded under Section 313, Cr. PC, 1973 that on the day of occurrence, Lal Singh PW 2 came to his well for taking bath, he enquired from him as to why he had come there when the relations between them were not cordial, he forcibly returned him out when he (Lal Singh) hurled abuses to him, in the evening, he was returning with his cart to his house, 'Marpeet' took place infront of the Nohara of Deoji Maharaj and he was arrested. The remaining parts of the prosecution story have either been denied or ignorance has been pleaded. He also disclosed in his statement that Kesar Singh PW 12, Lal Singh PW 2, Jethu Singh PW 5 Mohan Singh PW 7 and Devi started beating him with lathies and got him fell down from his cart, Suja and Bhalka saved him and took him to his house in an an injured condition, the bullocks of his cart got frightened and his cart moved towards the Bara of Purohit, the next day S.H.O. came to his house and saw his injuries, the police officer told him that his report would be recorded after he was recovered and he lodged a complaint to the Deputy Superintendent of Police after he was released on bail.' He examined Sujiya DW 1 in his defence. After hearing the parties, the learned Additional Sessions Judge held that the prosecution witnesses are not independent and reliable, the prosecution story is not correct and accordingly acquitted the accused-appellant. 4. After hearing the parties, the learned Additional Sessions Judge held that the prosecution witnesses are not independent and reliable, the prosecution story is not correct and accordingly acquitted the accused-appellant. 4. It has been contended by the learned Additional Government Advocate that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has seriously erred in rejecting the testimony of Lalsingh PW 2 and injured Mohan Singh PW 7 and Kesar Singh PW 10 on the ground that they were interested witnesses, these witnesses fully supported the prosecution story, Mohan Singh PW 7 and Kesar Singh PW 10 received injuries in the said occurrence & this guaranteed their presence at the time of occurrence. He further contended that the statement of Mst. Badna PW 1 was not carefully and cautiously read by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. He lastly contended that the learned Additional Sessions Judge was not right in rejecting the testimony of the prosecution witnesses on the ground that they failed to explain the injuries of the accused Narsinglal, 5. The learned counsel for the accused appellant duly supported the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge. 6. It is the admitted case of the parties that the relations in between the families of Lalsingh PW 2 and the accused Narsinglal were strained prior to the occurrence, Lalsingh PW 2 went to the well of the accused Narsinghlal to take bath in the morning of the day of occurrence, the accused protested it and forcibly turned him out therefrom after he (Lalsingh) abused him (Narsinghlal), Lalsingh PW 2 narrated this story to other members of his family, an occurrence took place the same day in the evening when the accused was returning to his house from his well along with his cart and bulls of his cart got frightened during the occurrence. The prosecution case is that the the ace used took out a "Jatru" from his cart and started beating Kesar Singh PW 10 with it when he protested about his said behaviour with Lalsingh PW 2 in the morning on his well. The prosecution case is that the the ace used took out a "Jatru" from his cart and started beating Kesar Singh PW 10 with it when he protested about his said behaviour with Lalsingh PW 2 in the morning on his well. On the contrary, the case of the accused is that Kesarsingh PW 10, Mohansingh PW 7, Jethusingh PW 5, Keshama Singh and Devisingh started beating him with their Lathies near the Nohra of Deoji Maharaj while he was passing there from, they got him fell down from his cart, the bullocks of his cart got frightened and the cart moved towards Purohit's Bara. Badna PW 1 blurted out the truth and said that Kesar Singh PW 10. Lalsingh PW 2, Mohansingh PW 7, Jethusingh PW 5, Deva and Chhatrang were armed with Lathies at the time of occurrence and they belaboured the accused Narsinghlal with their Lathies. Dr. Jaswantsingh Bhandari PW 8 examined the accused Narsinglal on 10-4-1975 and noted the following injuries on his person: "(1) Patient conscious, could walk, felt pain in right leg during walking due to injury; (2) Skin colour dark in comparison to colour of skin of body. The area of dark colour 21/2" X 1" upper arm (left) antero laterally mid region (old bruise) since centrally pale colour; (3) Scab with scratches in the area of 2" X 1" left fore arm near wrist joint swelling near area painful. Simple blunt and spiny object; (4) Lower end of ulna raised up near wrist joint swelling small size 1/4" X ⅛" would under healing process with scabs sides and on wound margin. Pale colour wound visible centrally; Suspected fracture of carpal bones and radio ulna bones lower end dislocation. Simple blunt and spiny object; (4) Lower end of ulna raised up near wrist joint swelling small size 1/4" X ⅛" would under healing process with scabs sides and on wound margin. Pale colour wound visible centrally; Suspected fracture of carpal bones and radio ulna bones lower end dislocation. Advised for X-ray; (5) old bruise dark coloured skin diffused 11/2" X 11/4" on left forearm mid region anteriority; (6) Bruise, dark coloured skin .reddish black 21/2" X 31/4" on right upper arm latero posteriorily mid region and lower end of humerus bone; (7) Healed wound with scabs white pink colour 1" X 1/4" on left temporal region; (8) Healed wound with scabs 11/2" x 1/4" left clavical near sternal end: (9) Scratch with scab 11/4" X ⅛" oblique on right left chin bone mid region, light leg, (10) Septic condition scab 1/4" X 1/2" just near scratch No. 9." Admittedly, no prosecution witness has offered any explanation of these injuries of the accused Narsinghlal. These injuries clearly show that the accused Narsinghlal was belaboured during the occurrence. They corroborated the version of the accused that the bulls of his cart got frightened during the occurrence. The bulls must have frightened when the accused was being belaboured by the prosecution witnesses. As already observed, the frighetening of the bulls is admitted by the prosecution witnesses. It is also admitted by the prosecution witnesses then Keshar Singh PW 10 came below the cart of the accused and as a result there of he received the injuries. It seems that Kesar Singh PW 10 came below the cart while the bulls of the accused got frightened. This explains the injuries of Kesar Singh PW 10 and be lies the prosecution story that the accused took over his cart upon the body of Kesarsingh PW 10. 7. Under these facts and circumstances it seems to be highly improbable that the accused would have taken out a "Jatru" from his cart to be labour Kesarsingh PW 10 and caused injuries to him when admittedly Lalsingh PW 2 Jethusingh PW 5, Mohansingh PW 7 were present there along with other persons and he was alone. His said version, i.e., that he was belaboured by the prosecution witnesses while he was returning to his house from his well in the evening, seems to be natural and highly probable. 8. His said version, i.e., that he was belaboured by the prosecution witnesses while he was returning to his house from his well in the evening, seems to be natural and highly probable. 8. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has rightly observed that the prosecution witness were highly interested. Lalsingh PW 2 admits that Jethusingh PW 5 and Mohansingh PW 7 are his uncle and brother respectively. Jethusingh PW 5 says that Kesarsingh PW 10 is his brother and Lalsingh PW 2 is his nephew. Mohansingh PW 7 admits that Lalsingh PW 2 is his brother Kesarsingh PW 10 is his uncle. Kesarsingh PW 10 admits that Lal Singh PW 2 and Mohansingh PW 7 are his nephews. 9. In view of these facts and circumstances, there exists no good ground to interfere with the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirohi. As such the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 10. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.Appeal dismissed. *******