JUDGMENT D.P. Singh, J. 1. Appellants Meraj An-sari and Shakil Ansari on being tried, have been found and held guilty for the offence under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Lohardaga in Sessions Trial No. 225 of 2001 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years each. As both the appeals arise out of the same judgment, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The prosecution facts are that in the evening of 26.11.2000. informant. Ashif Hussain, was returning after easing himself at 7.30 p.m. when these two appellants assaulted him with sharp cutting weapon, bhujali and katari, resulting in serious injuries on his vital parts. The informant raised alarms on which, villagers started assembling and the appellants fled away. The reason behind this attack was that he has made complaint to the family members of the appellants regarding them. 3. The informant was moved for his treatment at Sardar Hospital, Lohardaga where the police recorded his statement at 10.30 p.m. The police accordingly registered Lohardaga Police Station Case No. 139 of 2000 under Sections 341, 324, 307, 34 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The police investigated the case and finally submitted charge sheet against both the appellants under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Their cases were committed to the Court of Sessions where they were charged under Section 307/34 and 397/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed false implication. The learned trial Court after examining the witnesses found and held the appellants guilty for the offence under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code only and sentenced them to serve rigorous imprisonment for seven years each. 4. These present appeals have been preferred on the grounds that the trial Court has committed mistake of fact by believing uncorroborated evidence of the informant. It is also submitted that the incident took place in the dark night and there was no occasion for their identification in absence of any means of light. It is further submitted that when the trial Court has not believed the part of the story, regarding theft of wristwatch, this part of the story also should have been discarded. It is also submitted that the incident took place in the dark night and there was no occasion for their identification in absence of any means of light. It is further submitted that when the trial Court has not believed the part of the story, regarding theft of wristwatch, this part of the story also should have been discarded. It is also submitted that there was admitted enmity between the informant and the appellants and the investigation suffered due to non-production of seized torch and weapon of assault. According to the learned Counsel for the appellants, the nature of injuries found on the informant did not warrant such harsh punishment. As such, the appellants may be acquitted from the charge and discharged from the liabilities of their bail bonds. 5. Learned APP for the State opposed these contentions on the grounds that the petitioners are named to have assaulted the informant with intention to cause death and there is ample evidence on record supporting the prosecution version. 6. I have anxiously considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the appellants along with the evidence available in the case records. PW 4 is the informant, who has supported his fardbeyan in details. According to this witness, both the appellants used sharp cutting weapon, kalari and bhujali resulting in at least ten injuries. He has shown the scar mark of such injuries on the head and neck vide para-4 of the evidence. He further asserted that when he fell down on the ground, appellant, Meraj Ansari tried to cut his throat. This witness has admitted in cross- examination that he has not given the details of manner in which appellant Meraj Ansari tried to cut his throat to the police. He further admitted vide para-18 that people were coming out from mosque when the incident took place at about 7.30 p.m. He has denied that he implicated the appellants falsely in this case. PW 1 Md. Quayum Ansari, PW 2 Md. Ashique Hussain and PW 3 Ayub Ansari are villagers, who went to the house of the informant on hulla to find the informant lying injured, who disclosed about the involvement of the appellants. PW 1 and PW 2 are also witnesses on the fardbeyan recorded by police PW 1 has further admitted vide para-10 that police has recovered katari and torch same night. PW 1 and PW 2 are also witnesses on the fardbeyan recorded by police PW 1 has further admitted vide para-10 that police has recovered katari and torch same night. PW 2 has also asserted that he has seen the appellants fleeing away from the place of occurrence. PW 3 has signed over the seizure list as witness marked Ext. 1/4. 7. PW 5 Abdul Hakim and PW 6 Md. Nasiruddin Ansari have gone to the place of occurrence on hulla and found informant in injured condition. According to them, the informant disclosed the name of the appellants to have assaulted him. They have seen the weapon, katari and torch fallen at the place of occurrence PW 7 Md. Asif Hussain, is younger brother of the informant, who rushed to place of occurrence on hulla. raised by the informant and found him in seriously injured. PW 8 is the mother of the informant, who has also supported the prosecution case whereas PW 9 Sukur An-sari has been declared hostile. 8. PW 10 Zakir Ansari is Maulvi of the mosque, who reaches at the place of occurrence on hulla and saw the appellants assaulting the informant. PW 11 Mauzfar Alam is the Investigating Officer of this case. He has recorded the statement of the informant and took up investigation after registration of the case. He has recovered the weapon used in assault and seized three cell torch from place of occurrence. He has obtained the bloodstained katari and torch, vide Ext. 5. He further obtained injury report and finally submitted charge sheet. This Investigating Officer has admitted in cross-examination that he could not produce the Station Diary Entry made in the Police Station. He has also admitted that he has neither mentioned the name of the witnesses, who indicated the presence of torch and katari at the place of occurrence nor he seized the bloodstained soil. All these bloodstained katari and torch were not sent to Forensic examination PW 12 D.B. Sharma is the doctor, who examined the informant at 8.30 p.m. and found altogether ten injuries on him. all of them were caused by sharp cutting weapon, except one by hard and blunt substance, which according to him were dangerous for life. Learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the injuries found by the doctor do not cover under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. 9. Mr. all of them were caused by sharp cutting weapon, except one by hard and blunt substance, which according to him were dangerous for life. Learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the injuries found by the doctor do not cover under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. 9. Mr. Mishra, counsel for the appellants argued that there is all probabilities of false implication of the appellants because of certain disputes regarding which attention of PW 7 has been drawn vide para-9 of the cross- examination. It was pointed out that the witnesses examined by the prosecution were related with the Informant. According to the learned Counsel, in absence of production of seized katari and torch before the trial Court, conviction deserves to be set aside. It is also submitted that the Investigating Officer has not supported the prosecution case and admitted that there were exaggeration in the story of the prosecution by the informant and other witnesses. Therefore, the appellants may be acquitted from the charge. 10. Mr. Sahay, counsel appearing on behalf of the informant supported the prosecution case and pointed out that the" genesis of the occurrence has been positively proved by the witnesses examined before the trial Court. It is also submitted that the police has visited the place of occurrence and found bloodstained katari as well as torch in presence of the witnesses which is marked Ext. 5. It is also submitted that the doctor has found within an hour of the occurrence incised wounds serious in nature, in all ten, on various parts of the body of the informant. Therefore, it is not possible to be self-inflicted. 11. On consideration of the facts and materials on record it appears that in the evening of 26.11.2000, the informant has received a large number of injuries caused by sharp cutting weapon. The prosecution is that the appellants due to previous enmity caused these injuries on the informant while he was returning after easing himself from field. The identity of the appellants with whom the informant has close contacts and alleged enmity cannot be disputed even in dark evening. It is always possible that the informant could identify the appellants even in dark when they approached him and started to assault him with sharp cutting, weapon. The identity of the appellants with whom the informant has close contacts and alleged enmity cannot be disputed even in dark evening. It is always possible that the informant could identify the appellants even in dark when they approached him and started to assault him with sharp cutting, weapon. The probability of false implication is ruled out because immediately he raised alarms and witnesses arrived at the place of occurrence though near and dear of the informant. In all probabilities of alarms raised by the informant they would be first to rush to his rescue. PW 1, PW 3, PW 5. PW 6 and PW 7 own brother of the informant has not claimed that they actually saw the assault taking place, rather, they frankly admitted that they saw the informant in injured condition and were disclosed the name of the appellants. If the witnesses were interested they could have asserted that they saw the actual assault taking place. PW 2, father of the informant, PW 8, the mother of the informant and PW 10 named in the first information report have supported the informant in detail. I, therefore, find and held that the witnesses cannot be discarded just because they were relatives and near to the informant. 12. The trial Court has discussed all these points in the judgment vide para-8, 9 and 10. It has also discussed the nature of the injuries and concluding circumstances in which the injuries were caused by convicts, the appellants under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. I do not find any ground to disagree with him. 13. At this stage, learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the offence has taken place due to immature mentality of the appellants, who were aged 18 to 20 years at the time of occurrence. It is further submitted that they have already remained in custody for nearly three years and suffered a lot. Therefore, the sentences may be reduced and converted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. 14. Learned Counsel for the informant opposed on the grounds that the nature of the injuries shows the intention of the appellants and conviction under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code deserves to be maintained. 15. Therefore, the sentences may be reduced and converted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code. 14. Learned Counsel for the informant opposed on the grounds that the nature of the injuries shows the intention of the appellants and conviction under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code deserves to be maintained. 15. Having considered the backgrounds of the alleged offence along with the age of the appellants having no criminal antecedent, I find that the ends of justice would be served properly if the appellants are sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for three years along with a fine of Rs. 2000/- in lieu thereof to serve simple imprisonment for six months. This appeal is dismissed with modification in sentence as mentioned above. Accordingly, these appeals stand disposed of. Let a copy of-this order be sent to the lower Court for information and needful.