Judgment : D. N. PRASAD, J. ( 1 ) THIS criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22-2-1991 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka Camp at Jamtara in Sessions Case No. 441/12 of 1986/87 whereby and whereunder the learned Trial Court convicted appellant Nos. 1 and 2 under S. 307 of the Indian Penal Code whereas appellant No. 3 was convicted under S. 323 of the Indian Penal Code and appellant Nos. 1 and 2 were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, whereas appellant No. 3 has been released on furnishing a probation bond of Rs. 2,000. 00 with two sureties of the like amount with a direction to keep peace and be of good behaviour for one year. ( 2 ) THE case of the prosecution in brief is that on 23-8-1986 at about 11. 30 a. m. while the informant Gujar Turi was returning home and reached near the house of accused Sarjug Turi, all of a sudden, all the four accused persons including the appellants surrounded him and started assaulting him. Appellant No. 1 (Sarjug Turi) assaulted him with Dab whereas appellant No. 2 Chaturi Turi also assaulted with Dab and appellant No. 3 Bideshi Turi assaulted with Danda. It is also alleged that the appellants assaulted the informant only because of enmity between the parties. On hulla, the mother and wife of the informant rushed to the spot and they took him to the hospital thereafter treatment was made by the Doctor. The police investigated into the case and submitted charge sheet under Sections 323, 324 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. All the accused persons appeared before the Trial Court. Charges were framed accordingly under Sections 323, 324 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused/appellants, to which they pleaded not guilty. It may be mentioned here that accused Narayan Turi was not found guilty of the charges framed against him and, accordingly, he is acquitted of all the charges. ( 3 ) THE witnesses were examined in the Trial Court and after hearing both sides the learned trial Court convicted the accused/appellants in the manner as stated above. It may be mentioned here that accused Narayan Turi was not found guilty of the charges framed against him and, accordingly, he is acquitted of all the charges. ( 3 ) THE witnesses were examined in the Trial Court and after hearing both sides the learned trial Court convicted the accused/appellants in the manner as stated above. ( 4 ) ALTOGETHER seven witnesses have been examined on behalf of the prosecution in its support of whom P. W. 6 is the Doctor who examined the injured/informant and found the following injuries on his person :-"1 (A) Linear incised wound 1/4" length at distal Phalanx ventral surface ring finger left hand; (b) Linear incised wound 1/4" length at distal phalanx ventral middle finger left hand; (c) Incised wound 1/2" x 1/8" x skin deep at proximal plalanx ventral aspect index finger left hand; (d) Incised wound 1" x 1/6" x skin deep at distal phalanx ventral aspect left index finger. (e) Incised wound 1/2" x 1/4" x skin deep at Proximal Phalanx ventral aspect left thumb (hand ). 2. Lacerated wound 11/2" x 1" x skin deep at upper portion of left fore arm. 3. Linear abrasion 8" at upper half of back. 4. Incised wound 11/2" x 1/2" x skin deep at left temporal region face. 5. Lacerated wound 1" x 1/6" x skin deep at left front parietal region of scalp". All the injuries were found to be simple in nature whereas injuries No. 1, 3 and 4 were caused by sharp cutting instrument may be Dab or Katari and injuries No. 2 and 5 were caused by hard and blunt substance may be lathi. The injury report has been marked as Ext. 2. ( 5 ) P. W. 1, the mother of the informant stated that she rushed to the spot on hulla of her son Gujar Turi and found him in injured condition. Her son was taken to the hospital for treatment. Her son was assaulted because of enmity with the accused persons. She stated that Sarjug Turi (appellant No. 1) assaulted with Dab/farsa. She stated in her cross-examination that she was also examined by the police and she has stated before the police that appellants No. 1 and 2, Sarjug Turi and Chutri Turi had Dab/farsa at the relevant time. Chutri Turi is the son-in-law of Sarjug Turi. She stated that Sarjug Turi (appellant No. 1) assaulted with Dab/farsa. She stated in her cross-examination that she was also examined by the police and she has stated before the police that appellants No. 1 and 2, Sarjug Turi and Chutri Turi had Dab/farsa at the relevant time. Chutri Turi is the son-in-law of Sarjug Turi. ( 6 ) P. W. 2, the wife of the informant/victim has also stated that Sarjug Turi and Chutri Turi (appellants No. 1 and 2) were assaulting her husband with Dab/katari. She stated in her cross-examination that there was a quarrel earlier in respect of fetching water from well with the accused persons and they reached to the police station on the same day at 4 p. m. and thereafter they went to the hospital for treatment of her husband. ( 7 ) P. W. 3, the informant/victim stated that appellants No. 1 and 2 assaulted him with Dab and Farsa, whereas appellant No. 3 (Bideshi Turi) was holding lathi at the relevant time. He stated in his cross-examining that on the day of occurrence, he had not gone to his duty because of his ailment. He further stated that there is a case pending in the court of Munsif against appellant No. 1 Sarjug Turi and that suit is pending from before. ( 8 ) P. W. 4 (Didya Devi) stated that she also rushed to the spot and saw the informant in injured condition. She further stated in her cross-examination that the accused persons have also got their house in the nearby. ( 9 ) P. W. 5 is a hearsay witness and claimed to get the knowledge about the incident when he came back from duty. He further stated in his cross-examination that the informant was not doing work at the relevant time. ( 10 ) P. W. 7 is a formal witness. P. Ws. 1, 2 and 3 are consistent in deposing that appellants No. 1 and 2 assaulted the informant with Katari and this fact has also been corroborated by the Medical evidence as the Doctor (P. W. 6) found injuries No. 1, 3 and 4 caused by sharp cutting instrument/weapon may be Dab or Katari. It is true that all the injuries are simple in nature and there is nothing material coming to show that appellant Nos. 1 and 2 had any intention to commit the murder. It is true that all the injuries are simple in nature and there is nothing material coming to show that appellant Nos. 1 and 2 had any intention to commit the murder. For constituting the offence under S. 307 of the Indian Penal Code, it is essential for constituting the ingredients as regards to the intention of the assailants. The injuries said to be caused are simple in nature and assaults are not on the vital part of the body can safely be said that there was no such intention on the part of the accused persons i. e. appellant Nos. 1 and 2 for attempting to murder the informant. But it is unequivocally clear that the informant sustained injuries by sharp cutting weapon, which are simple in nature and, as such, the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code is made out. ( 11 ) THUS I find that the Court below committed error in convicting appellants No. 1 and 2 under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code instead of convicting the appellants under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. Moreover the Trial Court also committed error in convicting both the appellants No. 1 and 2 for the sole offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code but he has not found guilty the said appellants for the offence under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, which is apparently an error. Thus I find that appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are responsible for the injury caused by sharp cutting weapon constituting the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. ( 12 ) IN the result, both the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. ( 13 ) AS regards the conviction of accused/appellant No. 3 (Bideshi Turi) is concerned, the Trial Court rightly passed the order which does not require for any interference as there is specific and consistent evidence against him for assaulting with lathi and the injuries are simple in nature and so he has been rightly convicted with the said offence when appellant No. 3 (Bideshi Turi) has already been released after furnishing a probation bond of Rs. 2,000. 00. ( 14 ) THERE appears that this case is pending since 1986 and since then both the appellant Nos. 2,000. 00. ( 14 ) THERE appears that this case is pending since 1986 and since then both the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are facing trial and there is nothing on the record to show that this is not the first offence against appellant Nos. 1 and 2. ( 15 ) HAVING regard to the whole facts and circumstances and also taking into account the long pending case, both the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are also directed to be released on furnishing a probation bond of Rs. 2,000. 00 with two sureties of the like amount each to maintain peace and be of good behaviour from the date of execution of the said bond. The Trial Court is directed to get the bond executed by both the appellants i. e. appellants No. 1 and 2 by taking appropriate steps in the matter. Let the lower Court records along with a copy of the judgment be immediately sent down to the Trial Court concerned. ( 16 ) WITH the aforesaid observation, this appeal is dismissed. Appeal dismissed. --- *** --- .