G. S. N. TRIPATHI, J. ( 1 ) THE then VIIIth Addl. Sessions Judge, Bulandshahar vide his judgment and order dated 4-9-1979 passed in S. T. No. 9/79, State v. Om Prakash and two others convicted the accused Om Prakash, Madan and Kanchhi on a charge under Section 452, I. P. C. read with Section 34, I. P. C. and sentenced them to undergo 21/2 years R. I. and also pay a fine of Rs. 60. 00. On failure to pay fine, two months additional R. I. was awarded. These accused were further convicted under Section 324, I. P. C. read with Section 34, I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo 11/2 years R. I. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. All the accused were acquitted on the charge under Section 307, I. P. C. read with Section 34, I. P. C. only accused have preferred this appeal and not the State against the order of acquittal under Section 307/34, I. P. C. ( 2 ) THE prosecution story started on the basis of F. I. R. lodged by P. W. 4 Charan Singh on 25-8-1976 at about 1 a. m. after negotiating a distance of 1 mile. The incident is said to have taken place in the same night of 24/25-8-1976 at about 12 p. m. It is alleged that the accused are in inimical terms with the complainant and the injured Hari Singh. Litigation has been going on. In one criminal case, the complainant was on bail. This was disliked by the accused. In the night of occurrence, the complainant and Hari Singh, injured were sleeping in their Sehan. A lantern was burning. The accused Om Prakash and Madan along with Kanchhi, who is the brother-in-law of Om Prakash all of a sudden entered his house. Getting inkling, the complainant and the injured got up and raised an alarm. But the accused Om Prakash, Kanchhi and Madan pounced upon Hari Singh and caused knife injuries to him. Hearing the alarm, Allah Bux, P. W. 2, Girwar Singh, Shyam Lal and several other persons arrived and saw the accused. However, the accused escaped. ( 3 ) THE injured Hari Singh was medically examined in the same night at 1. 30 a. m. by Dr. B. K. Rastogi, P. W. 5. He found three injuries as noted by the learned Addl. However, the accused escaped. ( 3 ) THE injured Hari Singh was medically examined in the same night at 1. 30 a. m. by Dr. B. K. Rastogi, P. W. 5. He found three injuries as noted by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge at page 5 of his judgment. All of them were caused by knife. Injuries Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were on the vital parts and they could have resulted in death even, had medical aid not been provided in time. ( 4 ) AFTER usual investigation, a charge sheet was laid by the prosecution. ( 5 ) THE prosecution examined P. W. 1 Hari Singh, the injured. He has narrated the entire prosecution story as contained in the F. I. R. ( 6 ) P. W. 2 Allah Bux is the resident of the same neighbourhood. He knew the accused from before. After hearing the alarm, he proceeded towards the spot with a torch and lathi. He saw the accused and identified them. The accused were armed with knives and they caused injuries to Hari Singh. ( 7 ) P. W. 4 is Charan Singh another eye witness. He is also the complainant. He has also stated as done by Hari Singh, P. W. 1, P. W. 7 Girwar Singh is also an eye witness of the occurrence. ( 8 ) OTHER evidence is formal in nature. ( 9 ) P. W. 5 Dr. B. K. Rastogi has proved the injury report prepared by him. He has further said that injuries Nos. 1 and 2 could not have been self-inflicted or self-suffered as they were on the vital parts of the body. He has further opined that if the injury had been allowed to bleed further, the injured could have even died. ( 10 ) P. W. 6 is Sri S. N. Prasad. He has proved the chick and G. D. ( 11 ) P. W. 8 S. I. is Balbir Singh, the I. O. ( 12 ) THE accused in their statements under Section 313, Cr. P. C. have denied the allegations against them and have pleaded total ignorance with regard to the incident. Of course, they have pleaded enmity and said that on account of the same, they have been falsely implicated. The accused have led no evidence in their defence. P. C. have denied the allegations against them and have pleaded total ignorance with regard to the incident. Of course, they have pleaded enmity and said that on account of the same, they have been falsely implicated. The accused have led no evidence in their defence. ( 13 ) ACCUSED Om Prakash has said that his son Ved Ram was assaulted by Hari Singh, P. W. 1 and Charan Singh, P. W. 4 and a case under Section 325, I. P. C. has been pending against these accused and in order to pressurise these accused, this false case has been launched. The witness Girwar, Allan Bux wanted to take begar from the accused. On refusal, they have sided with the complainant. A similar statement has been made by Kanchhi and Madan as well. ( 14 ) AFTER evaluation of the entire circumstance and evidence on the record, the learned Sessions Judge found that the prosecution case was credible. He convicted the accused and sentenced them accordingly. ( 15 ) FEELING aggrieved, the accused have filed this appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellants Madan and Kanchi are said to have died. Only appellant Om Prakash is left. ( 16 ) I have heard learned counsel Sri J. S. Tomar and the learned State Counsel at great stretch and perused the record. I find that there is very little force in this appeal and it deserves to be substantially dismissed. ( 17 ) THE incident is said to have taken place in the night of 24/25-8-1979 around mid night. The F. I. R. was lodged in the same night at 1 a. m. after covering a distance of two miles. The accused were named and their weapons were also specifically mentioned apart from the witnesses, Medical examination took place in the same night at 1. 30 a. m. and as many as three knife injuries were found as noted by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge in the body of the judgment. Thus there was very little opportunity available to the complainant to cookup a false case. Such a prompt FIR is a veritable asset to the prosecution and court can usefully utilize it for corroboration purposes. Sessions Judge in the body of the judgment. Thus there was very little opportunity available to the complainant to cookup a false case. Such a prompt FIR is a veritable asset to the prosecution and court can usefully utilize it for corroboration purposes. Another beauty of the FIR is that it contains in detail the names, weapons, date, time and place of the occurrence and also the role played by the accused, apart from the factum of motive being in the shape of the enmity between the parties which is an admitted fact. Therefore, this FIR is complete in all respects. It cannot be said that the prosecution has developed itself at a later stage on the basis of legal advice or made any embellishment in its original version. Therefore, I agree with the learned Addl. Sessions Judge that the FIR is very useful piece of evidence. ( 18 ) FROM the statement of Dr. Rastogi P. W. 5, it is clearly established that the injured had received three injuries and all were caused by knife. All of them were on the vital parts of the body and could have resulted in death if prompt medical aid had not been made available. Not only this, he has turned down the suggestion that the injuries could have been self-suffered or self-inflicted. It has not been suggested to him that in fact these injuries were not on the person of the injured Hari Singh. This way, indirectly the accused have admitted the factum of injuries on the person of Hari Singh. They were quite fresh at the time of examination. Some of the injuries were bleeding at that time when the injured was examined by Dr. Rastogi. So, from the statement of Dr. Rastogi, the factum of injury is clearly established. ( 19 ) APART from it, we have the statement of P. W. 1 Hari Singh, the injured. He has given a vivid description of the incident and described the manner in which the accused caused knife injuries to him. He has also described that there was enmity between the parties and on account of that enmity, the accused had launched this attack. As observed earlier, even the accused admit that there was enmity between the parties vide their statement under Section 313, Cr. P. C. So the statement of Hari Singh is very reliable. After critical examination of the same. As observed earlier, even the accused admit that there was enmity between the parties vide their statement under Section 313, Cr. P. C. So the statement of Hari Singh is very reliable. After critical examination of the same. I find that it has not been suggested to him that he had not received injuries at all as an attempt was made with Dr. Rastogi, supra. The accused were known persons. They came in a very close contact and bodily touch with Hari Singh while causing knife injuries. There was a lantern as well. The accused were known persons. Even in star-lit night, they could have been identified without any difficulty. So, I am in agreement with the learned Addl. Sessions Judge that Hari Singh had adequate opportunity in identifying the accused unmistakably. Despite very lengthy cross-examination, the witness has remained unscathed. There is no reason to disbelieve him. He is an injured person. So naturally, he will not allow the real assailants to go scot-free and substitute them with imaginary and unreal culprits. So, I turn down the argument advanced by Sri Tomar that only on account of enmity, Hari Singh has implicated the accused in this case falsely. The result is that the solitary statement of Hari Singh, coupled with prompt medical report FIR and factum of enmity is sufficient to record conviction against the accused. Whether we take into notice the testimonies of other witnesses or not, it will make absolutely no difference as regards the culpability of the accused in this crime. ( 20 ) THAT apart P. W. 2 Alla Bux is a neighbour. After hearing alarm, he reached the spot. It is quite natural that the neighbours will come to the rescue of any other neighbour. The only allegation against him in the cross-examination was that he was an old aged person with weak eye sight. He could not identify the accused. He gave his age as 71 years. He denied the allegations that he was 92 years old. He had a torch, which he had shown to the I. O. and with the help of the same, he saw the accused and identified them. He is an independent witness and there is no reason for him to falsely implicate the accused. ( 21 ) P. W. 4 Charan Singh is the complainant and real brother of Hari Singh. He had a torch, which he had shown to the I. O. and with the help of the same, he saw the accused and identified them. He is an independent witness and there is no reason for him to falsely implicate the accused. ( 21 ) P. W. 4 Charan Singh is the complainant and real brother of Hari Singh. It is a night incident, which took place in the house of this witness. Therefore, his presence on the spot cannot be denied. He moved the machinery of law without any delay and lodged the report in the same night. He took the injured person to the Doctor and made available the prompt medical aid. This way, his presence on the spot cannot be disputed. Of course, he is real brother of the injured. But that alone is not sufficient to discard his testimony. Of course, it requires closure scrutiny of the court. I have applied that test while evaluating that testimony. A mere suggestion has been made in the end of the cross-examination that he was not present on the spot without any background for the same. Therefore, this suggestion will not help. The result is that the statement of Charan Singh is reliable. ( 22 ) P. W. 7 Girwar Singh is another eye-witness of the locality and he has deposed on the basis of his eye witness account, which he gathered from the spot. He has also no serious enmity with the accused and there is no reason why he will tell a lie. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge has properly evaluated his evidence and found that Girwar Singh is a reliable witness and I agree with the conclusions drawn by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. ( 23 ) THIS way, there appears no fault in the conclusion arrived it by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge and there is no force in this appeal. ( 24 ) LEARNED counsel has urged that about 19 years have passed. Two of the accused are dead. Therefore, a lenient view should be taken while passing the sentence I agree with this contention of the learned counsel. The accused have no previous conviction to their credit. There is no evidence on the record that they have repeated their performance after this incidence. Of course, they committed the crime due to enmity. Two of the accused are dead. Therefore, a lenient view should be taken while passing the sentence I agree with this contention of the learned counsel. The accused have no previous conviction to their credit. There is no evidence on the record that they have repeated their performance after this incidence. Of course, they committed the crime due to enmity. It is further said that accused Om Prakash, the sole surviving culprit is also aged over 60 years. Taking all these factors into consideration, leniency in the sentence can be shown. ( 25 ) ACCUSED Om Prakash is convicted on the charge under Section 452, I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo 6 months R. I. He is further convicted on the charge under Section 324/34, I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo six months R. I. and also ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 1000. 00. On failure to pay the same, additional two months R. I. shall be suffered by him. Both the sentences shall run concurrently. The appeal is substantially dismissed subject to the modification in the sentence as noted above. The accused Om Prakash is in jail already. As observed earlier, according to the affidavit filed by Ved Ram, accused Madan and Kanchhi appellants are dead. This court has also ordered on 5-1-1995 that their appeal shall abate. Further, by way of precaution, the learned C. J. M. is directed to send his report regarding the death of the accused Madan and Kanchi. It is worthy of mention that on 6-1-1995 the learned counsel Sri Tomar had represented before this Court that the parties have filed a compromise and this Court ordered that the compromise should be sent to the C. J. M concerned for verification. But later on after passing this order for sending the alleged compromise for verification, Sri Tomar submitted that he did not press the point of compromise and wanted to argue the case on merits. This prayer had been accepted and 9-1-1995 has been fixed for arguments and it is no more open to him to claim that the compromise should be sent to the lower court for verification. Order accordingly. .