Judgment K.S.Garewal, J. 1. Man Singh (32) and his brother Jaggi (25) were tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad for attempt on the life of Attar Singh and for causing injuries to Badam. Learned trial judge found both appellants guilty under Sections 307/326/325/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code vide judgment dated November 23, 1996. The appellants were sentenced to undergo 3 years under Section 307 read wth Section 34 I.P.C. and to other lesser sentences. Feeling aggrieved against their conviction and sentence the appellants have come up in appeal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants and the injured persons were farmers of Sondh in District Faridabad. On October 28, 1993 at about 4.00 P.M. Avtar Singh (PW-5) was grazing his buffaloes in a jungle adjoining the fields of the appellants. One of the buffaloes entered the field and the appellants started abusing Attar Singh. After this altercation Attar Singh returned to his fields. The appellants followed him, Man Singh was armed with country made pistol while Jaggi was armed with a pharsa. Man Singh fired a shot from his pistol which hit Attar Singh on his right hand and chest. Attar Singh raised an alarm which attracted Badam (PW-6) and Jas Ram (PW-7). Jaggi stepped forward and gave phara blow on the left hand of Badam. On Jas Ram intervention the two injured were rescued and the accused escaped from the spot. 3. Attar Singh was medico-legally examined by Dr. H.K. Misra (PW-3) Civl Hospital, Hodal who was found to have three punctured wounds of 0.5 cm in diameter on lower one third of right arm with diffuse swelling. Five punctured wounds of the same dimension on right elbow, and two punctured wounds on front of chest. According to the Medical Officer the injuries had been caused by fire arm and duration was about 6 hours. Badam was medico-legally examined and was found to have a spindle shaped incised wound on the left elbow. There was lacerated wound 6cm x 2cm muscle deep on the scapular over fronto parietal region. Swelling on the right index finger. Two lacerated wounds one of size 2cm x 1/2cm scalp deep on right parietal region and second of the size 2cm x 1cm muscle deep over middle of front of right leg. 4. There was lacerated wound 6cm x 2cm muscle deep on the scapular over fronto parietal region. Swelling on the right index finger. Two lacerated wounds one of size 2cm x 1/2cm scalp deep on right parietal region and second of the size 2cm x 1cm muscle deep over middle of front of right leg. 4. The matter was reported to the police by Attar Singh (PW5) and F.I.R. was registered at Police Station Hodal at 6-30 P.M. under Section 307/34 I.P.C. Investigation was commenced by SI Satyawati (PW-8) who after recording the statement of Attar Singh at the Police Station, referred the injured for medico legal examination. Both the accused were arrested on November 8, 1993. On the basis of Man Singhs disclosure statement a country made pistol was recovered from his possession alongwith live cartridges. Jaggis interrogation led to the recovery of Pharsa. Both the weapons were taken into possession. After completion of the investigation accused were sent up for trial. 5. Charge was framed against the accused under Section 307 I.P.C. for the murderous assault upon Attar Singh and under Section 326 read with Section 34 I.P.C. for causing grievous hurt to Badam. They were also charged under Section 325 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for causing grievous hurt to Badam. Accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed a trial. 6. Prosecution examined Dr. V.K. Aggarwal (PW-1), Patwari Rattan Lal (PW- 2), Dr. H.K. Misra (PW-3), HC Ram Parshad (PW-4), PW-5 Attar Singh, Badam (PW-6), Jas Ram (PW-7), SI Smt. Satya Wati (PW-8) and closed its case. The accused were examined under Section 313 Cr. P.C. They denied the various items of prosecution evidence and pleaded innocence. 7. Surprisingly the accused did not give any counter version of the incident and neither examined any defence evidence. It may be appropriate at this stage to record that from the examination of Dr. S.K. Misra it was revealed that Phoolwati wife of Bhajan Lal, mother of the appellants, was medico-legally examined by him at 10-30 P.M. on the same day i.e. October, 28, 1993 and found to have incised wound 4cm x lcm on the skull over right parietal region. Phoolwati had also complained of pain on her leg and left lumbar region. S.K. Misra it was revealed that Phoolwati wife of Bhajan Lal, mother of the appellants, was medico-legally examined by him at 10-30 P.M. on the same day i.e. October, 28, 1993 and found to have incised wound 4cm x lcm on the skull over right parietal region. Phoolwati had also complained of pain on her leg and left lumbar region. Jaggi was also medico-legally examined and found to have lacerated wounds 3cm x 2cm and 4cm and 4cm x 2cm on the tempo-parietal region and occipital region of the head alongwith abrasions on the head. Contusion on right forearm and pain on left forearm. Man Singh on medico-legal examination was found to have three lacerated wounds on the head with swelling on the left elbow, and dorsum of right elbow and right ankle. 8. The learned Additional Sessions Judge rejected the argument of the defence that the prosecution has failed to explain injuries on the accused and came to the conclusion that the accused did not possess the right of private self-defence. It was held that the accused had not pleaded this right. The occurrence had taken place in the fields of Attar Singh. Even if the injuries had not been explained, the accused were not entitled to acquittal because the injuries received by them were simple and the prosecution is not required to explain them. 9. Learned counsel has argued that the accused appellants had acted in bona fide right of private self-defence. 10. The question to be considered is whether failure of the prosecution to explain injuries on the accused would make a material difference in the present case particularly because the accused themselves have not explained how they received the injuries. It is strange why the accused did not plead self-defence in the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. where they failed to give any counter version. 11. The statement of an accused person under Section 313 Cr. P.C. is without oath. Accused while giving their statements always give a counter story, defence version or an explanation why they had got involved in the case. In the present case neither Man Singh nor Jaggi had given any counter version. Therefore, for them to argue that the prosecution must explain their injuries is somewhat puerile. In the cross-examination of the witnesses the accused could have suggested their defence version to the witnesses but even this was not done. In the present case neither Man Singh nor Jaggi had given any counter version. Therefore, for them to argue that the prosecution must explain their injuries is somewhat puerile. In the cross-examination of the witnesses the accused could have suggested their defence version to the witnesses but even this was not done. All that was put to the witnesses was that Man Singh had protested about the entry of Attar Singhs buffalo in his field. Attar Singh and Jai Ram had given injuries to the accused and Phoolwati and the accused person had given injuries to the witnesses in self-defence. Even if above mentioned suggestion can be accepted as constituting the counter version or the defence theory in this case, it is difficult to accept that Man Singh attacked with a pistol when he was hit by the witnesses and had fired at Attar Singh in self-defence. It is not known with what weapon the accused had been hit. Therefore, it is difficult to assess the nature and scope of the apprehension felt by them without retaliated in the self-defence. 12. In view of the above discusion, conviction and sentence of the appellants is upheld and this appeal is dismissed. Appellants shall be taken into custody forthwith to undergo remaining portion of the sentence.