Judgment Viney Mittal, J. 1. The present petition has been filed by Mohan, Shera, both sons of Balu Ram and Parbhati son of Sukh Ram challenging judgment dated July 14, 1989 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Faridkot whereby their appeal against judgment dated February 7, 1987 passed by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Muktsar was dismissed and their conviction under Sections 326/324/34 Indian Penal Code was maintained. 2. The prosecution version is that on December 22, 1984, Manphool, his son Bhanwar Lal and Boora Ram came to Muktsar in the cattle fair to purchase a buffalo. All the three petitioners were present in that fair. Mohan is stated to have borrowed a sum of Rs. 3,000/- from Manphool about 3 years back and when Bhanwar Lal demanded his money from Mohan, he was infuriated. All the petitioners are stated to be armed with Gandasas. Mohan exhorted his companions to teach a lesson to Bhanwar Lal for insulting them in the cattle fair. Thereupon, all the petitioners gave Gandasa blows to Bhanwar Lal. 3. Shri G.S. Doad, Advocate who was originally counsel for the petitioners has since expired. Under these circumstances, on my request Shri Hemant Bassi, Advocate has agreed to assist this Court on behalf of the petitioners and as such he is appointed as amicus curiae to defend the petitioners in this Court. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance, have also gone through the record. 5. It is submitted by Shri Hemant Bassi that although the occurrence is stated to have taken place in a cattle fair where there was a large crowd but none of the independent witnesses has been associated by the prosecution nor any one of them has been produced in support of the prosecution version. The prosecution has merely felt satisfied by producing Manphool and Boora Ram whereas Boora Ram is the brother of the injured and Manphool was his father. Boora Ram has ultimately not even supported the prosecution version. It has also been pointed out by Shri Bassi that Boora Ram as well as Manphool had sworn separate affidavits which are Exhibits DB and DC produced on the record. As per the aforesaid affidavits, both the persons had stated that the injuries were caused by some other persons and the same were not attributable to the petitioners. 6. It has also been pointed out by Shri Bassi that Boora Ram as well as Manphool had sworn separate affidavits which are Exhibits DB and DC produced on the record. As per the aforesaid affidavits, both the persons had stated that the injuries were caused by some other persons and the same were not attributable to the petitioners. 6. Keeping in view the circumstances of this case, it is apparent that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the petitioners. 7. Under these circumstances, I have no hesitation to allow this petition and after setting aside the judgments of the Courts below and acquit the accused- petitioners of the charges against them. 8. Before parting with this judgment, I record my appreciation for the assistance rendered by Shri Hemant Bassi, Advocate who was appointed as amicus curiae in the present case.