This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19.7.2005 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nagaon in Sessions Case No.268(N)2006 convicting the accused appellant of offence under Section 307/324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default, to rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for the offence under Section 307 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default, to rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for the offence under Section 324 IPC. 2. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment, the accused appellant preferred this jail appeal. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 3.5.2004 at about 8 A.M. while one Dimbeswar Bora was taking bath on the backside of his residence, the accused Ashok Bhumij, who concealed himself in the cow-shed of the said Dimbeswar Bora, suddenly came out being armed with a dao and started attacking him with dao in his hand for which, Shri Bora sustained injuries on his person. 4. On being assaulted, Dimbeswar Bora raised alarm, for which his daughter-in-law and other neighbouring people rushed to the place of occurrence and apprehended Ashok Bhumij, who was still with dao in his hand. Narrating the aforesaid incident, Dr. Kinaram Bora, a neighbour of the victim, lodged an F.I.R. with Haiborgaon Police Outpost. 5. On receipt of the same, the I/C of the outpost forwarded the same to the jurisdictional Police Station for doing the needful in accordance with law. On receipt of the written F.I.R., the O/C, Nagaon Police Station registered a case under Section 326/307 of the Indian Penal Code and ordered investigation. 6. During the course of investigation, the I/O visited the place of occurrence, prepared the sketch map of the same, examined the witnesses, arrested the accused person and did other needful and on completion of investigation, he submitted charge sheet under Section 326/307 IPC against the accused person and sent him to Court for facing his trial. Learned Magistrate, before whom the charge sheet was so laid, committed the case to the Court of Sessions as the offence under Section 307 IPC is exclusively triable by Court of Sessions. 7. Learned Magistrate, before whom the charge sheet was so laid, committed the case to the Court of Sessions as the offence under Section 307 IPC is exclusively triable by Court of Sessions. 7. On receipt of the case on commitment, the learned Sessions Judge after hearing the parties and on going through the materials on record, framed charge under Section 326/307 I.P.C against the accused person and the charge, so framed, on being read over and explained to the accused person, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 8. During trial, the prosecution has examined as many as 8 witnesses including the informant, Medical Officer and the Investigating Officer. The statement of the accused person under Section 313 CrPC was also recorded. In his statement under Section 313 CrPC, the accused stated that during the time under consideration, he worked as a domestic helper in the house of Dimbeswar Bora. However, Sri Bora did not give him money and also did not allow him to go home. 9. On his refusal to allow him to go home, there was a scuffle between him and Dimbeswar Bora and in that scuffle, Dimbeswar Bora sustained injuries from the dao, which was in the hand of the accused. The accused appellant, however, on being required, did not adduce any evidence. Learned trial Court, on conclusion of the trial and after hearing the counsel for the parties, held the accused guilty of offences under Section 326/307 IPC, convicted him accordingly and sentenced him to punishment as aforesaid. 10. It is that judgment which has been assailed in this appeal. I have heard the learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the appellant and also the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. Learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the accused appellant submitted that in view of the materials on record, he is not going to challenge the judgment impugned of the trial Court nor did he raise any question in respect of the sentence imposed upon the accused appellant. 11. I have perused the materials on record keeping in view the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. On making such an exercise, I am of the opinion that the judgment of the trial Court invites no interference in view of the materials on record and the same is accordingly affirmed. 12. Consequently, this jail appeal is dismissed. 13. On making such an exercise, I am of the opinion that the judgment of the trial Court invites no interference in view of the materials on record and the same is accordingly affirmed. 12. Consequently, this jail appeal is dismissed. 13. Return the L.C.R. to the lower Court along with a copy of this judgment and order. 14. I appreciate the assistance rendered by Mr. B.Chakraborty, learned Amicus Curiae. He be paid an amount to the tune of Rs.5,000/- as being his fees. _____________