Judgment ( 1. ) APPELLANT No. 3 Mst. Sakhi Bai alias Ram Sakhi has expired during the pendency of this appeal hence appeal has been abated against her. ( 2. ) THIS criminal appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of criminal Procedure has been filed by the appellants being aggrieved by the impugned judgment, finding and sentence dated 18. 08. 1999 passed by Sessions Judge, Tikamgarh in sessions Trial No. 106/98, whereby the appellants have been convicted under Section 333/34 of I. P. C. and sentenced to R. I. for 3 years with fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine S. I. for 2 months, each respectively. ( 3. ) THE prosecution case in short is that on 14. 04. 1991 Gajraj singh, Head Constable and Rajaram Constable of Police Station niwari went to serve warrant in villages Tola, Poojanpura and kena. On the way they received the information that Dhaniram and Nathu Ram are making country liquor and selling it to the persons. Therefore, they along with Rajendra and chandrabhan went there and saw that two cans of liquor were kept there and 3-4 persons were sitting there and they were drinking the liquor. Dhaniram and Nathuram were caught but they shouted on account of which Mst. Bati Bai and Mst. Sakhi @ Ramsakhi (now deceased) daughters of Dhaniram came there and hurled stones on account of which they sustained injuries. Dhaniram and Mst. Bati @ Ramsakhi also assaulted with the lathies on account of which they sustained injuries. Four liters country liquor with can was seized. On return back at police station, Niwadi Head Constable Gajraj Singh submitted written report (Ex. P-10) on the basis of which F. I. R. (Ex. P-11) was written. Accordingly Crime No. 84/91 under section 34 of Excise Act and Sections 353, 332, 336, 294, 506-B, 34 of I. P. C. was registered against the appellants. The injured persons Gajraj Singh and Rajaram were sent for medical examination. Dr. Munna Lal Gupta (PW-1) has conducted their medical examination on the same date and found the injuries as mentioned in medical reports Ex. P-1 and ex. P-2. Gajraj Singh was advised for x-ray of his right little finger. On x-ray the fracture of metacarpal bone was found. The country liquor with plastic can was seized vide seizure memo Ex. P-12. The map Ex. P-7 was prepared. P-1 and ex. P-2. Gajraj Singh was advised for x-ray of his right little finger. On x-ray the fracture of metacarpal bone was found. The country liquor with plastic can was seized vide seizure memo Ex. P-12. The map Ex. P-7 was prepared. The statements of the witnesses were recorded. After completing the investigation the charge sheet was filed in the court of Judicial magistrate First Class, Niwari who committed the case to the sessions Court for trial. ( 4. ) APPELLANTS were charged under Section 333/34 of I. P. C. They abjured the guilt and claimed to be tried mainly contending that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated. Prosecution examined as many as 8 witnesses and the accused persons also examined 2 witnesses in their defence. After appreciating the evidence trial Court found them guilty under Section 333/34 of I. P. C. and sentenced thereto as stated hereinabove in para No. 1 of this judgment. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment, finding and sentence the instant appeal has been preferred on the grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal. ( 5. ) SHRI Z. M. Shah, advocate was engaged by the appellants as their counsel but he did not appear to argue on 23. 06. 2009. Since the appeal was of the year 1999, therefore, shri Awadesh Kumar Gupta was appointed from the panel of high Court Legal Services Committee to argue the matter on behalf of the appellants so that this appeal may be disposed of expeditiously. ( 6. ) SHRI Awadesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in proper perspective. The independent witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. The case under section 333/34 of I. P. C. has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt hence the finding of guilt is erroneous which deserves to be set aside and the appellants are entitled for acquittal. ( 7. ) ON the contrary, Shri Jaideep Singh, learned Govt. Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent/state supported the impugned judgment, finding and sentence mainly contending that prosecution has proved the guilt beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants have caused grievous hurt to Gajraj Singh. The trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant hence no interference is called for. ( 8. Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent/state supported the impugned judgment, finding and sentence mainly contending that prosecution has proved the guilt beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants have caused grievous hurt to Gajraj Singh. The trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellant hence no interference is called for. ( 8. ) THE main point for consideration in this appeal is that whether the trial Court has committed any illegality in convicting and sentencing the appellants under Section 333/34 of I. P. C. ? ( 9. ) GAJRAJ Singh (PW-7) and Rajaram (PW-4) are injured persons. On the day of incidence i. e. on 14. 04. 1991 Gajraj singh was posted as Head Constable and Rajaram as constable at Police Station, Niwadi, District Tikamgarh. On that day in the morning they have gone to village Teela, poojanpura, Kena for serving out the warrants and inquiring about some applications. At the time of evening when they were returning on the way, they received the information that appellants Dhaniram and Nathuram are making the country liquor and selling to the persons, therefore, on such information they reached at the well of appellant Dhaniram. They saw that the liquor was kept there in a container and some persons were sitting drinking the liquor. They seeing these witnesses. As soon as they started ran away seizure of liquor they raised hue and cry. Appellant Mst. Bati Bai and mst. Sakhi Bai @ Ramsakhi daughters of Dhaniram came there, they hurled the stones and caused the injuries. Appellants Dhaniram and Nathuram also inflicted lathi blows on account of which they sustained injuries. ( 10. ) IN spite of such obstruction they seized the country liquor. The appellants did not sign the seizure memo. They crushed the can and the liquor fell down. They could seize 4 liters country liquor only. Thereafter they returned at police station Niwari where Gajraj Singh (PW-7) submitted written report (Ex. P-10) on the basis of which F. I. R. (Ex. P-11) was registered. Injured persons were sent for medical examination. ( 11. ) DR. Munna Lal Gupta (PW-1) on 14. 04. 1991 examined rajaram and found following injuries:- (i)Abrasion over the poplitial fossa on right lower limb size 1" x 1". (ii) Abrasion over the back side anterior aspect of the ankle region left foot size 1" x 2". P-11) was registered. Injured persons were sent for medical examination. ( 11. ) DR. Munna Lal Gupta (PW-1) on 14. 04. 1991 examined rajaram and found following injuries:- (i)Abrasion over the poplitial fossa on right lower limb size 1" x 1". (ii) Abrasion over the back side anterior aspect of the ankle region left foot size 1" x 2". (iii)Bruise over the left lateral of the abdomen size 1" x 1". (iv)Bruise over the dorsal aspect 2 cm left hand size 1" x 1". (v)Bruise over the anterior aspect of left thigh size 1" x 1". These injuries were simple in nature cased by hard and blunt object. Medical report is Ex. P-1 which contains his signature. ( 12. ) ON the same day he also examined Gajraj Singh and found the following injuries: (i)Lacerated would over the bank of the pinna of the left ear size 1cm x cm x cm. (ii)Bruise swelling over the left parietal region after scalp size 1 " x 2". (iii) Radish swelling over the posterior aspect of the right little finger and of right hand size 1 cm x 1 cm. Advised x-ray of the right little finger. (iv)Reddish swelling over the palmer aspect of the left hip size 3" x 2". (v)Abrasion over and above the right upper lip region size " x ". (vi)Abrasion over the left chest in the last rib size " x ". These injuries were simple in nature caused by hard and blunt object. Medical report is Ex. P-2 which contains his signature. ( 13. ) THIS witness also took x-ray of right little finger of Gajraj singh and found fracture of metacarpal bone. The x-ray report is Ex. P-3 and x-ray plate is Ex. P-4. According to him the injuries to Rajaram and Gajraj Singh could not be caused by fall. ( 14. ) GAJRAJ Singh (PW-7) and Rajaram (PW-4) have been cross examined at length but their evidence has not been rebutted on the material point. Nothing has been carved out from their evidence so as to discredit their testimony. These are the injured witnesses who have given the evidence against the appellants as to how they committed this crime. The report was immediately lodged. They were immediately medically examined and the injuries were found on their persons as stated hereinabove. ( 15. Nothing has been carved out from their evidence so as to discredit their testimony. These are the injured witnesses who have given the evidence against the appellants as to how they committed this crime. The report was immediately lodged. They were immediately medically examined and the injuries were found on their persons as stated hereinabove. ( 15. ) NO doubt Chandrabhan Yadav (PW-2), Rajendra Singh (PW-3) and Thakurdas (PW-8) have not supported the prosecution case hence they have been declared hostile. But the evidence of injured witnesses Gajraj Singh (PW-7) and rajaram (PW-4) is sufficient to prove the guilt. ( 16. ) C. P. Dwivedi (PW-5) recorded F. I. R. (Ex. P-11) on the basis of the written report Ex. P-10 and seized two plastic cans containing country liquor vide seizure memo Ex. P-12. It shows that the report was immediately lodged at Police station Niwadi and country liquor was also seized. ( 17. ) NO doubt, the prosecution has not produced any documentary evidence to show that Gajraj Singh and Rajaram had gone to the aforesaid villages for serving the warrant and inquiring some matters. However, R. S. Saxena (PW-6) has stated that these witnesses had gone for doing such work. Gajraj Singh (PW-11) and Rajaram (PW-4) have also given evidence to this effect hence there is no reason to disbelieve the statement of these witnesses. Moreover, it is reflected from the statements of the accused that these appellants were knowing Gajraj Singh and Rajaram from before the incident that they are posted at Police Station Niwadi as Head constable and Constable. When they were trying to seize the country liquor they obstructed them in discharging their public duties. Not only this, they also caused their marpeet on account of which Gajraj Singh suffered grievous injury. ( 18. ) THE appellants have also produced two witnesses hariram (DW-1) and Ganesh (DW-2) in their defence. The defence of the appellants is that Gajraj Singh and Rajaram used to come at the well of Dhaniram and used to demand cock. On that day also they demanded the same which was refused on account of which they caused marpeet to Mst. Bati bai and Mst. Sakhi Bai @ Ramsakhi (now deceased ). Thus from the evidence of these defence witnesses also the presence of Gajraj Singh and Rajaram is proved at the spot. ( 19. On that day also they demanded the same which was refused on account of which they caused marpeet to Mst. Bati bai and Mst. Sakhi Bai @ Ramsakhi (now deceased ). Thus from the evidence of these defence witnesses also the presence of Gajraj Singh and Rajaram is proved at the spot. ( 19. ) NO F. I. R. or complaint has been produced by the appellants. No any injury report has been adduced regarding causing of injury to appellant No. 2 and 3 by these witnesses. Thus the appellants have failed to prove their defence by cogent evidence. Hence the trial Court has rightly rejected the defence version. ( 20. ) ON appraisal of entire evidence, it is manifestly clear that the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellants, therefore, the trial Court has not committed any illegality in finding them guilty for the offence under Section 333/34 of Indian Penal Code. The finding of guilt recorded by the trial Court does not call for any interference. ( 21. ) SO far as the sentence is concerned, the incident is of 1991, one of the appellants is lady and two others are aged old aged persons, hence the sentence deserves to be reduced. ( 22. ) CONSEQUENTLY, this appeal is partly allowed. The conviction passed by the trial Court under Section 333/34 of i. P. C. is hereby maintained. However, sentence is reduced from 3 years R. I. to 1 year R. I. each, maintaining the sentence of fine amount. The appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds are discharged. They are directed to surrender before C. J. M. , tikamgarh on 26. 08. 2009 for serving out the remaining part of sentence. ( 23. ) SINCE appellant No. 3 Mst. Sakhi @ Ramsakhi has died during the pendency of this appeal hence the appeal against her has been abated.