Judgment INDU PRABHA SINGH, J. 1. Appellant No. 1. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari. has been convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years. Appellant Nos. 2. Bishwanath Tiwari and 3 Ramanuj Tiwari. have been convicted under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months. 2. The prosecution case. in short, is that on 2.3.1985 at about 4 p.m. informant. R.M.Kishore Tiwary was sitting at his Darbaja. The appellant. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari armed with Rami and other accused persons, namely. Ramanuj Tiwari Janardan Tiwary and Bishwanath Tiwary armed with lathi came before him and started digging his courtyard for putting bamboos therein. When the informant objected, then the appellant. Bishwanath Tiwari and coaccused Janardan Tiwary (since acquitted) abused him and ordered to kill him. It has been alleged that the appellant. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari. gave a Rami blow on the head of the informant, Ram Kishore Tiwary and after sustaining bleeding injury, he fell down then Ramanuj Tiwary assaulted him with lathi also. the informant also sustained injuries on his head, beck, waist and chest. It has been further stated that his wife Duleshwari Devi came to save him raising Hulla, the appellant. Bishwanath Tiwary ordered to assault her also. Thereupon the appellant , Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari gave a Rami blow which injured left hand of Duleshwari Devi. Appellant. Bishwanath Tiwari assaulted her with lathi. Thereafter appellants. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari and Ramanuj Tiwari took away golden Karnful from her ears. The appellant Bishwanath Tiwari took golden chain containing Jiutia from her neck. On hulla. Narsingh Rai came and tried to intervene then he was also assaulted with lathi by appellant Ramanuj Tiwary and Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari. When the other villagers assembled, then the appellants fled away. On the next day the fardbeyan of the informant (Ext. 4) was recorded by ASI of Bikramganj Police Station at Mauni Maharaj Hospital. Bikramganj where the informant was admitted for treatment. On that basis, a formal FIR (Ext. 3) was drawn up. The police started investigation and after completion of investigations charge sheet was submitted against all the accused persons. On the next day the fardbeyan of the informant (Ext. 4) was recorded by ASI of Bikramganj Police Station at Mauni Maharaj Hospital. Bikramganj where the informant was admitted for treatment. On that basis, a formal FIR (Ext. 3) was drawn up. The police started investigation and after completion of investigations charge sheet was submitted against all the accused persons. Accordingly, cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the court of session where the trial concluded with the result as stated above. 3. The appellants pleaded not guilty and stated that they have been falsely implicated in this case. 4. The prosecution in support of its case has examined altogether 11 witnesses. P.W. 1 is Narshing Rai. P.W.2 is Basudeo Tiwary. P.W. 3 is Lal Bihari Singh. P.W.4 is Jag Narain Tiwary. P.W. 5 is Ram Kishore Tiwary informant. P.W.6. Duleshwari Devi is the wife of the informant. P.W.7 is Dr. Raj Mani Singh who has examined both the injured. P.W.8, Ram Prasad Singh. P.W. 9. Bal Kuer Rai and P.W. 10. Rang Lal Chaudhary are formal witnesses. P.W. 11. Maheshwar Jha, is the I.O. of this case. 5. The defence has also examined D.W.1, Lal Babu Srivastava. on the plea of alibi of appellant No. 1. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari. 6. P.W.1, Narsingh Rai. who belongs to the village of the informant has stated that at the time of the alleged occurrence he had gone to the house of the informant Ram Kishore Tiwary for fixing the date of marriage of his son. After some times. accused Dadan Tiwary. Ramanuj Tiwary. Bishwanath Tiwary and Janardan Tiwary came there. According to him appellant. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari armed with Rami and other accused persons were armed with lathi. They stalled to put bamboos on the courtyard of the informant. When the informant objected. then appellant Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari gave a Rami blow on the head of the informant. He sustained bleeding injuries and fell down. He has further stated that when the informant fell down the appellant. Ramanuj Tiwari assaulted him with lathi The wife of the informant. Duleshwari Devi, came running to save her husband, and she was also assaulted with Rami. The appellant, Bishwanath Tiwari, assaulted her with lathi. According to him when he went to intervene them then appellant. He has further stated that when the informant fell down the appellant. Ramanuj Tiwari assaulted him with lathi The wife of the informant. Duleshwari Devi, came running to save her husband, and she was also assaulted with Rami. The appellant, Bishwanath Tiwari, assaulted her with lathi. According to him when he went to intervene them then appellant. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari assaulted him with lathi portion of the Rami. According to him he did not go to Hospital for his treatment. 7. P.W. 2. Basudeo Tiwari. who also belongs to the village of the informant, has stated that on hearing hulla he went to the Darbaja of the informant. He saw all the accused persons on the courtyard of the informant. He also saw appellant, Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari having a Rami and other accused persons having lathis in their hands. He saw that all the accused persons were putting bamboos on the Angan. When the informant objected then he was abused by the a accused persons. Thereafter appellant. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari gave a Rami blow on his head and other appellants gave lathi blow on him. According to him appellant. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari also assaulted the wife of the informant on her neck and arm. P.W. 3 has also supported the version of P.Ws. 1 and 2. 8. P.W.5. Ram Kishore Tiwary, is the informant. He has stated that at about 4 p.m. on 2.3.1985 he was at his Darbaja and was seeing Panchang alongwith Narsingh Rai (P.W.1). At that time, appellant. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari. armed with Rami and the other accused persons armed with lathis came to his courtyard. They started digging on Sahan to erect bamboos on it. When the informant objected then appellant Bishwanath Tiwari and co-accused Janardan Tiwary instigated the other accused persons to assault him. On their Orders, appellant, Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari gave Rami Blow twice on the head of the informant. He sustained bleeding injuries. Appellant. Ramanuj Tiwari gave him lathi blows on his back. arm and shoulder. He has further stated that when his wife came running to save him. she was also assaulted with Rami by appellant. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari. The other appellants also gave her lathi blows. He sustained bleeding injuries. Appellant. Ramanuj Tiwari gave him lathi blows on his back. arm and shoulder. He has further stated that when his wife came running to save him. she was also assaulted with Rami by appellant. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari. The other appellants also gave her lathi blows. When Narsingh Rai (P.W. 1) came to intervene then he was also assaulted with lathi. According to him he raised alarm and the villagers came there then the accused persons fled away. According to him he and his wife went on rickshaw to the hospital at Bikramganj where they were examined by private Doctor, Raj Mani Singh. His fardbeyan was also recorded by A.S.I. at Bikramganj. He has further stated that the appellant. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari was in service at Daltenganj in R.E.O. office. 9. P.W. 6. Duleshwari Devi, is the wife of the informant. she has stated that at the time of the alleged occurrence she was near the well and was washing utensils on the courtyard. Her husband and Narsingh Rai (P.W.1) were consulting Panchang. At that time accused persons came there. Appellant. Punendu Jee Tripathi was armed with Rami and others were armed with lathi. They came and started digging the courtyard for irrecting the bamboos for which her husband objected, then the appellant, Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari instigated the other accused and appellant. Dadan Tiwari gave a Rami blow on her husband. He sustained bleeding injury and fell down. Thereafter the appellant Ramanuj Tiwari assaulted him with lathi. According to her she wanted to save her husband but she was also assaulted with Rami on left hand by appellant, Bishwanath Tiwari. Appellants also gave him lathi blow. 10. P.W. 7. Dr. Raj Mani Singh, has examined both the injured and found the following injuries on the person of Duleshwari Devi: (i) One incised bleeding injury 1 "x 1/4" x skin deep on the left forearm below elbow. (ii) One tender swelling 3 "x 2" on the left shoulder with reddish blue impression over it. (iii) Reddish scratches on both side of neck below ears. According to him all the injuries were simple in nature. Injury No. (i) caused by sharp cutting instrument and injury No., (ii) by hard blunt substance whereas injury No. (iii) was caused by sharp pointed substance. 11. (iii) Reddish scratches on both side of neck below ears. According to him all the injuries were simple in nature. Injury No. (i) caused by sharp cutting instrument and injury No., (ii) by hard blunt substance whereas injury No. (iii) was caused by sharp pointed substance. 11. He has also found the following injuries on the person of the informant. Ram Kishore Tiwary: (i) One incised wound 1-1/2 "x 1 Rs 4" x scalp deep on occipital region of head to the left of the mid line. (ii) Tender bluish swelling 2-1/2 "x 1/4" on the right forearm below elbow. (iii) Multiple radish blue impression with swellings around on back. According to him all the injuries were simple in nature. Injury No. (i) was caused by sharp cutting instrument and the others by hard and blunt substance. 12. P.W. 11, Maheshwar Jha. the I.O. of this case has stated that he visited the place of occurrence on 6.3.1985. According to him he did not find any bamboo erected on the courtyard nor he found sign of digging of the courtyard. He did not see any blood stained clothes. 13. D.W. 1 has stated that the appellant, Punendu Jee Tripathi was in service at Daltenganj. Ext. B is the initial of appellant Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari. Ext. C is the writing of Sachidanand and Exh. B/1 is the writing, signature and seal of the attendance register from 1983 to March. 1986. 14. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that there are contradictions in the deposition of the witnesses and the same has not been considered properly by the court below. He has further submitted that all the eye-witnesses are interested witnesses and they have also not supported the case of the prosecution. 15. The submission of the learned counsel so far as the contradiction in the deposition of the witnesses are concerned there is no hard and fast rule but the testimony of the witnesses be rejected only on the ground that they have contradicted each other about manner and details of occurrence. So far interested witnesses are concerned the court has to be more cautious and careful while scrutinising such witnesses. The witnesses who saw the occurrence have been examined by the prosecution. So far interested witnesses are concerned the court has to be more cautious and careful while scrutinising such witnesses. The witnesses who saw the occurrence have been examined by the prosecution. It has been pointed out that the informant (P.W. 5) though has stated that Narshing Rai (P.W. 1) also got injury of lathi blow and he was also examined by the Doctor alongwith the informant and his wife but this fact has not been supported by Narshing Rai (P.W.1) neither P.W. 6 and P.W. 7 (Doctor) have supported this fact. However, the prosecution case can not be thrown away only on this count since from the deposition of P.Ws. 1, 5 and 6 it appears that the informant was assaulted by lathi side of Rami and he did not sustain any injury on his person. The other points which have been raised by the learned counsel even though there was Government Hospital but the injured informant and his wife chose to go to a private Doctor. In this regard P.W. 5 himself has stated in paragraph 2 of the deposition that he straight way went to the private Hospital but the Doctor stated in paragraph 3 of his deposition on that the injured were referred to him by A.S.I. Bikramganj, P.W, 11 the I.O. has contradicted this statement of P.W.7and has stated that on information from the Doctor he recorded the statement of the injured at Raj Mauni Hospital Bikramganj which goes to show that the injured himself preferred to go to a private hospital. It may be mentioned that the Doctor might be known to him from before P.W. 7 the Doctor found all the injuries simple in nature. In this case there are number of the witnesses who have supported the manner of occurrence as stated in the FIR. As such it is clear that the prosecution has proved its case and the learned court below has rightly convicted the appellants for the offence punishable under Sections 324 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. 16. Coming to the question of sentence the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants has submitted that the appellant No. 1. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari is the full brother of the informant (P.W. 5) and appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are nephew of the informant (P.W. 5). 16. Coming to the question of sentence the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants has submitted that the appellant No. 1. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari is the full brother of the informant (P.W. 5) and appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are nephew of the informant (P.W. 5). It has been further submitted that the occurrence took place on trifling matter between the brothers for erecting a bamboo on the courtyard. There was no premeditation and it all happened after an altercation on between the informant and the appellants. 17. Having regards to the submissions raised on behalf of the learned counsel for the appellants and in the facts and circumstances of the he case, in my view. it will be expedient in the interest of justice if the appellant No. 1. Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari is sentenced to a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and appellant Nos. 2. Bishwanath Tiwari and 3, Ramanuj Tiwari are sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each to be deposited by these appellants within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In default appellant No. 1 shall have to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and appellant Nos. 2 and 3 shall have to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. It has been further submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that appellant No. 1, Punendu Jee Tripathi alias Dadan Tiwari is in service at Daltenganj. He has further submitted that the sentence so awarded would affect his career and he would loose his job and as such some lenient view may be taken on this point as well. 18. Considering the submissions and facts and circumstances of the case that since appellant No. 1 is in Government service and it not a case of moral turpitude and occurrence took place for erecting a bamboo it is made clear that the order of conviction and sentence will not affect his service career in future. It is also made clear that the amount fine. if and when realised by the appellant, shall be paid to the informant (P.W. 6) and his wife (P.W. 6) by may of compensation. 19. With the aforesaid modification in the sentence this appeal is dismissed.