Judgment SOMESHWAR NATH PATHAK, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 19.5.1992, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, II, Siwan, in Sessions Trial No. 100 of 1980. The sole appellant had been convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years. 2. Prosecution case originated on the fardbeyan of Ramdeo Mali, recorded on 1.3.1979 by the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Alsi Mahto, in the State Dispensary, Daraunda, wherein it had been alleged that on last Tuesday at 4.00 p.m. his sister had gone to scrape grass in the fields where one Munna Gosai (who has been acquitted by the Trial Court) teased her. She came back home crying and narrated the occurrence to her family members. Subsequently, the informant went to the house of Munna to complain against his act of teasing his sister. Munna became inflamed and threatened to teach a lesson to the informant, whereupon the informant returned home. At 3.00 p.m., appellant Satrughan Singh, Munna Gosai, both armed with bhala and Naresh Singh armed with lathi came to his house and the appellant Shatrughan Singh thrust a bhala blow into the bowel of his father, Laxmi Mali. Munna and Naresh also assaulted Laxmi Mali with lathi. When the informant raised alarm, the assailants fled away. The occurrence was witnessed by the informants neighbours including Shaligram. The intestines of the injured were.out from his bowel. The injured was carried to the hospital by Shaligram,, Ramcharitra Bhagat, Tuntun Pandit and Ghosh Pandit where he was treated. The accused appellant took up the defence of false implication and it was his case-that the informants father sustained injuries after falling from Khajoor (palm) tree. 3. The appellant was charged under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code as also under Section 307 simpliciter. 4. The prosecution had examined in all ten witnesses. PW 10 was the Criminal Investigation Departments Inspector who had received injury report regarding informants father and submitted charge-sheet. He brought on the record (exhibit 3). He further brought on record the fardbeyan (Exhibit 4). He further proved the case diary written by Ramnath Mahto from page 1 to page 31. PW 9 was the doctor, who found one penetrating injury on middle of the abdomen of the injured, Laxmi Mali. He brought on the record (exhibit 3). He further brought on record the fardbeyan (Exhibit 4). He further proved the case diary written by Ramnath Mahto from page 1 to page 31. PW 9 was the doctor, who found one penetrating injury on middle of the abdomen of the injured, Laxmi Mali. The dimension of the.injury was 1 x 1/2 x abdominal cavity deep with loop of the intestine coming out. The aforesaid injury was grievous and it was caused by some sharp pointed weapon, such as bhala. Out of the rest of the eye-witnesses, PW 4 was not the eye- witness although he had seen him in an injured condition and he had also carried him to the hospital. PW 2 did not see the alleged occurrence because he was out of the village on that date. Out of the rest, PW 8 was the sister of the informant who supports the occurrence of teasing indulging in by Munna which gave rise to the alleged occurrence over an altercation that took place between the informant and Munna and other witnesses, supported the alleged occurrence of assault upon the informants father in which he received an injury at the hands of Satrughan Singh. 5. The evidence was criticised on the ground that there was enmity between the parties over encroachment of some of the lands of the accused appellant. The aforesaid ground of enmity instead of becoming a cause of false implication would rather give an impetus to the accused to indulge in the alleged assault. More over, the immediate cause for the alleged occurrence was the complaint which the informant made against the act of teasing by Munna. So I think that there was not a good ground of implicating the accused appellant in a false case. It is also not understandable why the informant would implicate the appellant in a false case and would spare the real culprit. 6. It was next submitted by the appellants lawyer that the informants father might have sustained injury on fall on the ground and might have implicated the appellant on account of enmity. In this connection, the suggestion that was given to PW 5 was that the informants father had fallen from Khajoor tree and sustained injury as alleged. The suggestion was denied. In this connection, the suggestion that was given to PW 5 was that the informants father had fallen from Khajoor tree and sustained injury as alleged. The suggestion was denied. I do not think any body falling on the ground from a palm tree will sustain the injury as found by the doctor unless some pointed weapon or substance pierces his abdomen in such a way as to bring out his intestine. More over, even if any body falls from a Khqjoor tree, it is not necessary that he will fall down on the ground mouthwise and not backwise. The suggestion given to the informant in this connection was, therefore, perhaps, just a suggestion to built up a defence on imagination. No evidence was led by the appellant regarding the truth of the informants father receiving injury from fall from the Khqjoor tree. 7. It was submitted by the learned lawyer for the appellant that the Trial Court disbelieved the prosecution case that the two other accused persons, namely, Munna Gosai and Naresh Singh had participated in the alleged occurrence. But I find that the Trial Court did not state in its judgment that Munna and Naresh were not present at the place of occurrence and that they had not visited the informants house in the company of Satrughan Singh. The Trial Court, rather, held that since no injury upon the informants father caused by hard and blunt substance was found as per the prosecution case, perhaps, the informant exaggerated the alleged occurrence to bring even Munna and Naresh within the meaning of or mischief of, alleged occurrence. Therefore, the Trial Court gave benefit of doubt to the two accused, Munna and Naresh. This finding of the Trial Court will, in no case, imply that Naresh and Munna had not gone to the house of the in- formant on the alleged date and at the alleged time. Munna was the main culprit against whom the informant had raised the grievance regarding his act of teasing. It was, therefore, quite natural for Munna to accompany Satrughan in going to the house of the informant. The finding recorded by the Trial Court in favour of Munna and Naresh will not also imply that Satrughan Singh did not indulge in the assault upon the informant. 8. It was, therefore, quite natural for Munna to accompany Satrughan in going to the house of the informant. The finding recorded by the Trial Court in favour of Munna and Naresh will not also imply that Satrughan Singh did not indulge in the assault upon the informant. 8. So, I am of the opinion, that the findings of guilt recorded by the Trial Court against the, appellant was well warranted on the evidence on record. As far as the sentence is concerned, it has been submitted that the appellant was sixteen years of age of the date of occurrence and this was his first occurrence so the sentence may be reduced. 9. Taking into consideration the circumstances on the record and the submission made by the lawyer of the appellant, I think that sentence of seven years may serve the cause of justice. The Court is required to award consign punishment neither more nor less that is required by the circumstances of the case. 10. In the result, this appeal is dismissed with the above modification in the sentence.