Judgment :- U.V. Bakre, J. 1. This is State appeal against acquittal. 2. Both respondents were the accused persons in Sessions Case No. 16 of 2007. The said case was culmination of a charge sheet filed by Curchorem Police against the accused for offence punishable under Sections 447, 307, 323, 427, 504 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C., for short). 3. Case of the prosecution, in short, was that on 10/06/2006 at about 18.30 hours at Guddemol, Sanvordem, Sanguem, Goa, the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention criminally trespassed into the courtyard of Smt. Sapana Desai, armed with wooden danda and bamboo danda and damaged the scooter bearing no. GA-02/E-0740 belonging to her, assaulted her husband namely Ganaba Desai with the said dandas on his head with intention to kill him and thereby causing grievous injuries to him and when Smt. Sapana and her son Gangesh Desai intervened to help Ganaba Desai, they were also assaulted and they sustained simple injuries and the accused also abused them in filthy words as 'chedyechya', etc. 4. In order to prove the charges, the prosecution examined altogether 17 witnesses. PW.8 Smt. Sapana Desai had lodged the oral report which is at Exhibit 36. Offence was registered at 03.00 hours, on the same day. PW.7 Shri Ganaba Desai is the husband of PW.8. PW.9 Mrs. Nirmala Naik is the neighbour of PW.7 and PW.8 whereas PW.5 Anirudh Manerkar is the son of PW.9. PW.13 Gangesh Desai is the son of PW.7 and PW.8. PW.11 Mr. Ronny Yohan is one of the boys, including PW.5 and PW.13, who were playing football on the ground and had gone to the spot after hearing shouts. All the above six witnesses are eyewitnesses. PW.14 Dr. Vinod Naik had examined PW.7 and PW.13 at P.H.C. Cacora-Curchorem, between 7.30 to 8.15 p.m. on 10/6/06. The hurt certificates are at Exhibits 51 and 52. PW.16 Dr. Jorson D'Costa had subsequently, on the same day, examined PW.7 at Goa Medical College Hospital in the Neuro Surgery Department. The medico-legal certificate is at Exhibit PW.12/A. PW.1 Shri Vishal Gadhe had given his motorcycle to PW.13, for taking his father to hospital. PW.2 Dr. Clare D'Mello did the blood grouping of PW.7. The certificate of blood group is at Exhibit 17. The medico-legal certificate is at Exhibit PW.12/A. PW.1 Shri Vishal Gadhe had given his motorcycle to PW.13, for taking his father to hospital. PW.2 Dr. Clare D'Mello did the blood grouping of PW.7. The certificate of blood group is at Exhibit 17. PW.3 Shri Vishwas Ghate is one of the panch witnesses for the panchanama of scene of offence/sketch (Exhibit 20). PW.4 Shri Manjunath Wadar is one of the panch witnesses for the panchanama (Exhibit 23) of attachment of clothes of PW.5 and PW.9. PW.6 Shri Tulshidas Naik is one of the panch witnesses for the panchanama (Exhibit 29) of attachment of clothes of PW.7. PW.10 Santosh Naik acted as one of the panch witnesses in the panchanama of recovery of danda at the instance of accused no.1. This panchanama is at Exhibit 40. Lastly, PW.12 Shri Vincent Paes, PW.16 Shri Ashok Desai and PW.17 Shri Gurudas Kadam are Investigating Officers. 5. The case of the accused persons was of denial simplicitor. They did not examine any witness in their defence. 6. Upon minute assessment of the entire evidence on record, the learned Additional Sessions Judge -II, South Goa, Margao (trial Court, for short) was of the view that there are many inconsistencies in the deposition of the eye witnesses due to which it is difficult to believe their versions. The learned trial Court held that the recovery of the weapons at the instance of accused no.1 is not reliable since the same was done almost after a month from the date of occurrence of the incident; identification of the said dandas was not reliable; the dandas were not sealed; and no blood stains were detected on the said weapons. The trial Court found that PW.17 has admitted that in the hurt certificate of PW.7 issued from the Casualty Department of Goa Medical College, it is recorded that it was a case of history of assault by unknown persons. Therefore, the trial Court has observed that if it was known that accused had assaulted PW.7, it is not understood why it was recorded as a case of assault by unknown persons. The learned trial Court further held that a material piece of evidence is lacking in the prosecution case since the blood stained earth has not been collected from the site of assault. The learned trial Court further held that a material piece of evidence is lacking in the prosecution case since the blood stained earth has not been collected from the site of assault. Since the blood group from the clothes of PW.9 and PW.5 could not be detected and there was no explanation about the existence of blood stains on the back side of the said clothes, the trial Court held that no reliance can be placed on the said circumstance of existence of blood on the clothes of those two witnesses. He next found that though as per the evidence of some of the witnesses, PW.9 had covered the bleeding wounds of the victim with a towel which towel was soaked with blood, the prosecution had not made any efforts to trace the said towel. In addition to the various inconsistencies and infirmities in the evidence of the prosecution pointed out by it, the trial Court further found that the prosecution has failed to prove as to what was the motive for the accused in committing the alleged offence. According to the trial Court, the witnesses have attempted to exaggerate the injuries and the condition of the victim after the alleged assault. The trial Court also found that the evidence on record was not sufficient to prove the offence of house trespass or of mischief. He also found that the evidence on record is not sufficient to hold that the accused had abused PW.8 or PW.7. Ultimately, the learned trial Court was of the view that the accused were entitled for benefit of doubt. Hence, both the accused persons were acquitted of the offences with which they were charged. The State is aggrieved by the impugned Judgment and Order. 7. Assailing the impugned Judgment and order vehemently, Mr. Amonkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, invited our attention to the testimonies of several eye witnesses namely PW.5, PW.7, PW.8, PW.9, PW.11 and PW.13 and after reading the said depositions submitted that there are hardly any discrepancies or inconsistencies which can be termed as material so as to render the testimonies unreliable. He further submitted that the testimonies of the said eyewitnesses are duly corroborated by the medical evidence given by PW.14 and PW.15. He further submitted that the testimonies of the said eyewitnesses are duly corroborated by the medical evidence given by PW.14 and PW.15. He next submitted that in addition to the above, there is evidence of PW.3, the panch witness for scene of offence panchanama which proves that damages were caused to the scooter, fencing, Hero Honda motorcycle and the grills of the entrance of the house. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the clothes of the injured PW.7 were attached and this panchanama of attachment has been duly proved by PW.6 and as per the report of C.F.S.L., Hyderabad, blood was detected on these clothes. He also submitted that according to PW.9 and PW.5 blood had fallen on their maxi and shirt respectively. He pointed out that the said maxi of PW.9 and the shirt of her son namely PW.5 were attached under the panchanama proved by PW.4 and as per the report of C.F.S.L., Hyderabad, blood was detected on these clothes. According to the learned Government Counsel, there is more than sufficient evidence on record to prove the guilt of both the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. He pointed out from the evidence of PW.15 that PW.7 had sustained grievous injuries which according to PW.15 can some times be life threatening. He submitted that the intention to kill PW.7 can be inferred from the nature of the injuries caused to him and therefore according to him even the offence punishable under Section 307 of the I.P.C. is proved by the prosecution. 8. Per contra, the learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the accused, submitted that casual perusal of the evidence on record may show that there is sufficient evidence on record but a deep and minute scrutiny of the entire evidence on record, as is done by the learned trial Court, clearly reveals that the whole truth has not been disclosed and that genesis of the offence is not known. He submitted that there is suppression of the actual place of incident and there was no motive for the accused to assault the witnesses and in such circumstances the various inconsistencies which have been pointed out by the learned trial Court are relevant and they are sufficient to disbelieve the case of the prosecution or at least to give benefit of doubt to the accused persons. He contended that no case is at all made out for application of section 307 of I.P.C. since there was no intention to kill. According to him there is lot of exaggeration made by the prosecution due to which the case becomes suspicious. The learned Counsel submitted that there is no perversity in the impugned Judgment and Order and that even if another view is possible, this Court cannot interfere with the acquittal since the view adopted by the trial Court is a probable view. He therefore submitted that the appeal be dismissed. 9. We have perused the entire original record and proceedings carefully in the light of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for both the parties.10. The incident had occurred on 10/06/2006 at about 6.30 p.m. Thereafter, PW.7 and PW.8 were at P.H.C. Cacora-Curchorem where PW.7 was examined by the medical officer at 7.30 p.m. and from there PW.7 was taken to Goa medical college hospital at Bambolim, accompanied by PW.8. PW.8 had lodged the oral report (Exhibit 36) on 11/06/2006, while she was in Goa Medical College, Hospital. The offence was registered on the same day at 03.00 hours. PW.8 has explained in her cross-examination that as she was taking care of her husband, she could not file the complaint immediately. Thus, there was hardly any time for PW.8 to manipulate the report which she gave to the police in the hospital itself. It is pertinent to note that prior to the recording of the said oral report, NC complaint(Exhibit 67) of the injured PW.7 was duly recorded by PW.16, the then Assistant Sub-Inspector of Curchorem police station, at about 8.30 p.m. on 10/6/2006, itself. Even in this complaint it is recorded that at Guddemol, Sanvordem both the accused persons came to the house of Sapana Desai and Ganaba Desai and without any reason assaulted Ganaba Desai on his head with danda and caused injuries and also assaulted Sapana Desai on her right leg. No doubt, the NC was registered for offence under Section 323 of I.P.C., since by this time the nature of injuries was not known. Since the NC complaint was lodged immediately after the incident, it can be said that there was no chance for any manipulation. 11. No doubt, the NC was registered for offence under Section 323 of I.P.C., since by this time the nature of injuries was not known. Since the NC complaint was lodged immediately after the incident, it can be said that there was no chance for any manipulation. 11. PW.7 has deposed that two days prior to the incident one Subhash Payni informed him that Deepak, son of accused no.1, had told him that he (PW.7) has become goonda in the locality and that two days thereafter while Deepak was passing by that side he asked him as to why he was spreading rumours and spoiling his name. According to PW.7, Deepak did not react and went away. PW.7 has deposed that his wife and he had gone to meet Nirmala at his neighborhood on the same day at about 6.00 p.m. in order to apply medication to the injuries suffered by him to his leg in an accident. When she was applying medicines, by about 6.15 p.m., Gautam came running and was crying and informed that both the accused had come and that the accused no. 2 who was armed with a danda had damaged the scooter bearing no. GA-02-E-0714 and also bamboo gate. PW.7 has stated that his wife and he immediately rushed to the house and saw accused no. 2 standing with the danda and when asked as to why he had damaged the scooter, accused no. 2 started abusing by saying 'chedyechya'. PW.7 has stated that accused no.1, who was behind the garage, came behind him and assaulted with danda on his head and then accused no. 2 gave a danda blow on him from front due to which he sustained bleeding injury. According to PW.7, the accused also abused his wife when she came to his rescue, by saying 'chedyechya'. He has stated that he fell unconscious and regained consciousness in GMC. PW.7 has stated that at the time of incident he was wearing half sleeves shirt with black and red checks and had removed the said shirt in GMC and that it was then in the custody of nurse. He has stated that he was wearing a half pant of brown colour with white belt. He has stated that accused no. 1 had a wooden danda whereas accused no. 2 had bamboo danda. He has stated that he was wearing a half pant of brown colour with white belt. He has stated that accused no. 1 had a wooden danda whereas accused no. 2 had bamboo danda. PW.7 has identified his clothes and the two dandas shown to him in the Court. He has stated that the incident took place in June, 2006. PW.7 has stated that police had recorded his statement in GMC. 12. In his cross-examination, PW.7 has admitted that he had not witnessed the damage done to the scooter or to the gate as he had reached the spot later. He could not remember the exact date of assault whether it was 11th June. He has been confronted with his police statement wherein there is no mention as to what clothes he was wearing at the time of assault. He has stated that he personally did not hear Deepak spreading any rumours against him. He has stated that he had told the police that both the accused had came to assault with poles (khut) used for wooden fencing. He has admitted that he was assaulted with the said poles (khut). According to PW.7, the dandas of the type of MO3 and MO4 are easily available in the market. He has stated that accused no.1 assaulted him with bamboo danda and only two blows were given to him one with MO3 and other with MO4. He has stated that the bamboo blow was given to him from behind and the blow with wooden danda from front. According to him, the fight went on for about 10 minutes and many people had gathered at the spot. He has stated that prior to the incident, the accused no.1 and his son were occupying a room of his house and he had asked them to vacate the room and they had done so. He has further stated that the injury to the leg was sustained by him when he was starting the motorcycle. He has been confronted with his police statement wherein it is recorded that leg injury was sustained in a road accident. 13. PW.8 has deposed that on the morning of 10/06/2006 someone informed her husband that Deepak, son of accused no. 1 was abusing him by saying “Tum Vodlo Dada Zala”. He has been confronted with his police statement wherein it is recorded that leg injury was sustained in a road accident. 13. PW.8 has deposed that on the morning of 10/06/2006 someone informed her husband that Deepak, son of accused no. 1 was abusing him by saying “Tum Vodlo Dada Zala”. She has deposed that when her husband inquired with Deepak as to why he was spoiling his name, Deepak left the place quietly. She has stated that in the afternoon she and her husband had gone to the house of Nirmala Manerkar for applying medication to the leg of her husband who had suffered a fracture injury and at that time her sons Gangesh and Gautam had gone out to play and there was no one in the house. She has stated that her younger son came to them and informed her husband that the accused had come to their house and were hitting dandas on the gate, motorcycle and scooter. She has deposed that her husband and she rushed to the spot and Nirmala Manerkar and Anirudh also followed them and they saw Bhima (accused no. 2) standing at the gate with a bamboo in his hand. She has also stated that her husband asked the accused as to what they were doing. When her husband was inquiring, accused no.1 came from the garage, from behind, and gave blow on the head of her husband with wooden danda and the accused no. 2 gave a blow with the bamboo from the front due to which her husband suffered bleeding injury on both the sides of his head. She has stated that she rushed to the help of her husband when accused no. 2 gave a danda blow on her right leg. She has stated that accused no. 2 also abused her by saying “chedi” and also hurled abuses at her husband with filthy words. She has stated that Nirmala Manerkar then went to the help of her husband and also one Ronny came to the spot to help them. She has stated that after the assault accused ran away with the dandas and Nirmala, Anirudh, Ronny and she took her husband to the hospital at Kakoda in their vehicle. She has stated that Nirmala Manerkar then went to the help of her husband and also one Ronny came to the spot to help them. She has stated that after the assault accused ran away with the dandas and Nirmala, Anirudh, Ronny and she took her husband to the hospital at Kakoda in their vehicle. The Doctor sutured the wound but since her husband started vomiting blood the Doctor advised them to shift him to Hospicio Hospital and the Doctor at Hospicio Hospital advised them to take him to GMC, Bambolim. She has explained that since she was taking care of her husband she could not lodge the complaint immediately. She has stated that on account of the damage to the gate and to her two wheelers she suffered a loss of about Rs. 1000/-. She has stated that the blood from the injuries suffered by her husband had fallen on his shirt collar, on the maxi of Nirmala and on the clothes of Anirudh. She has further stated that her husband was wearing half sleeves shirt with red and black checks and half pant of brown colour whereas Nirmala was wearing green colour maxi with flower design. She has identified the dandas MO3 and MO4 and also the maxi of Nirmala and the clothes of her husband. She has stated that when they were in Kakoda Hospital, her son Gangesh came there and informed that he too was later assaulted by the accused. She had produced her complaint which is at Exhibit 36. 14. In her cross-examination, PW.8 has been confronted with her police statement wherein it is not stated that Bhima abused her though it is stated that both the accused abused her with filthy words. She has been further confronted with the police statement wherein it is not recorded that the accused ran away with the danda and also that the damages caused to her were worth Rs. 1000/-. She has also stated that she did not tell the police as to what clothes Nirmala and Anirudh were wearing at the time of incident. She has stated in the cross-examination that she did not witness as to who had caused the damage to the vehicles or to the gate. 1000/-. She has also stated that she did not tell the police as to what clothes Nirmala and Anirudh were wearing at the time of incident. She has stated in the cross-examination that she did not witness as to who had caused the damage to the vehicles or to the gate. She has stated that her husband had suffered fracture injuries when he was alighting from a bus and since the said accident had taken place on the road, she had stated in the complaint that it was road accident. She has stated that Nirmala Manerkar gives local medication. PW.8 had specifically stated that the blood from the wound of her husband did not fall on the ground. She has stated that she did not suffer any bleeding injury and that one of her toes was swollen and leg too had swollen. She has stated that she had seen as to what was the damage caused to the motorcycle. According to her, the said damage was to the front bumper and a cover to the lever near the brake and the mirror of the scooter was damaged. She has further stated that there were signs of blows of danda on the gate and two plastic barrels and the bucket were thrown on the ground at the place of incident. She has stated that when her son was assaulted, she was not present. She has also stated that she does not know as why the accused have assaulted them. 15. Considering the testimonies of PW.7 and PW.8 as a whole, it can certainly be said that they have corroborated each other in all material aspects. There are hardly any inconsistencies in their testimonies. No doubt there are some omissions in their police statement, which however are natural and can be termed as negligible. It is pertinent to note that the unshaken testimonies of PW.7 and PW.8, have strong support of medical evidence. 16. PW.14, the Medical Officer, PHC, Cacora-Curchorem, had examined PW.7 on 10/06/2006 at 7.30 p.m., i.e. soon after the incident. He has deposed that the patient was complaining of vomiting and also of loss of consciousness. PW.14 found tender Contused Lacerated Wound in the frontal region, of the size: 3 cms x 2 cms, muscle deep; 2 cms x 2 cms, muscle deep, and 2 cms x 4 cms, muscle deep. Haematoma was present around the wound. He has deposed that the patient was complaining of vomiting and also of loss of consciousness. PW.14 found tender Contused Lacerated Wound in the frontal region, of the size: 3 cms x 2 cms, muscle deep; 2 cms x 2 cms, muscle deep, and 2 cms x 4 cms, muscle deep. Haematoma was present around the wound. This was thus a triangular wound. PW.14 further noticed another Contused Lacerated Wound in occipital region of the size 2 cms x 1 cm, muscle deep. Haemotoma was present around this wound also. PW.14 has stated that he referred Ganaba Desai to Hospicio Hospital for further examination, management and expert opinion. The Hurt Certificate in respect of PW.7, prepared, signed and produced by PW.14 is at Exhibit 51. 17. PW.15, the Senior Resident in Neuro Surgery Department of GMC hospital examined PW.7 who was referred to them from Hospicio Hospital with alleged history of assault on 10/06/2006. PW.15 has stated that Ganaba had a sutured wound on frontal region at the midline, 6 cms and another sutured wound on high parietal region in midline, 5 cms. PW.15 has stated that the City scan showed right temporal subdural haemorrhage. According to PW.15, the injury was grievous in nature. He has also added that subdural haemorrhage can sometimes be life threatening. According to PW.15, such injuries can be caused by dandas which are MOs 3 and 4. In his cross-examination, he has stated that thin rim of SDH in right temporal region was not visible to the naked eye and that injury was inside the brain. That explains as to why PW.14 did not notice the said grievous injury. PW.15 has identified his signature on the medicolegal certificate which is at Exhibit PW.12/A. The evidence of PW.14 and PW.15 is not shaken in their cross-examination and there is no reason to disbelieve their versions and the medical certificates issued by them. 18. In addition to the medical evidence, the testimonies of PW.7 and PW.8 have been corroborated by other eyewitnesses also. 19. PW.9 has deposed that she knows that Sapana had lodged complaint against the accused persons, who are their villagers, as they had assaulted Ganaba with danda. 18. In addition to the medical evidence, the testimonies of PW.7 and PW.8 have been corroborated by other eyewitnesses also. 19. PW.9 has deposed that she knows that Sapana had lodged complaint against the accused persons, who are their villagers, as they had assaulted Ganaba with danda. She has deposed that at 6.00 p.m. she was at home and Ganaba and his wife came to her house on that day for some medication and when they were sitting in her house, son of Ganaba came and informed that both the accused were damaging their property due to which Ganaba and his wife immediately rushed to their house. She has added that she followed them and when reached at the spot she noticed that utensils were scattered and gate was damaged. She has further deposed that when Ganaba reached the spot, accused no. 2 was near the gate and Ganaba asked accused no. 2 as to why he has caused the damage and at that time the accused no. 2 was armed with a danda and when Ganaba made inquiries with accused no. 2, accused no.1 came from somewhere and gave a danda blow on the head from behind. PW.9 has deposed that after the blow, Ganaba was falling down and at that time accused no. 2 gave blow on the head from front side upon which Ganaba collapsed and had suffered bleeding injuries. She has stated that the accused started abusing the wife of Ganaba with filthy words. She has then stated that wife of Ganaba and she went to help Ganaba and people had also gathered and by that time the accused went away. She has stated that she found one towel and since Ganaba was bleeding severely she used the said towel to cover the wound. According to her, they took Ganaba to hospital at Kakoda in a vehicle and from there he was referred to the hospital at Margao. She has stated that she and her son had helped in putting Ganaba in the vehicle and at that time the blood had fallen on her maxi and shirt of her son. She also stated that she was wearing the maxi with design of white flowers and her son was wearing a shirt with strips and she handed over the maxi and shirt to the police. She also stated that she was wearing the maxi with design of white flowers and her son was wearing a shirt with strips and she handed over the maxi and shirt to the police. PW.9 has stated that the towel which was used to cover the wound of Ganaba was thrown by her in the river while returning home. PW.9 has identified the dandas MO3 and MO4. She has also identified the maxi as well as the shirt of her son. 20. In her cross-examination, PW.9 has admitted that Ganaba had suffered injury to his leg in an accident. She has stated that she was applying some rural medicines to his injuries. She has stated that the utensils which were scattered near the house of Ganaba were of steel, plastic and aluminium and that the gate was of iron and there was a dent to that gate. She has stated that the motorcycle was lying at that place and the bamboos of wooden gate were also lying on the ground. She has further stated that she had not witnessed the throwing of utensils or motorcycle or damage to the gate and that she does not know as to who had caused the said damage and had thrown the utensils. She has stated in her cross-examination that she had not seen the accused no. 2 giving blow since he had suddenly come. She has also stated that one blow was given on the right leg of Sapana but she does not know as to who had given the said blow. She has stated that she is on visiting terms with the complainant though not closely acquainted with her and also does not have any strained relations with the accused. 21. PW.5, the son of PW.9, has deposed that on 10/06/2006 about two years back Gangesh, Ronny, Nandan and others and he were playing on the ground at 5.45 p.m. when they heard a loud noise of banging towards the house of the complainant and Gautam, the son of complainant came running and started telling something to his brother Gangesh. According to PW.5, Gangesh then went towards the house of Anirudh whereas Gautam went towards his house and they all followed Gautam. PW.5 has stated that when they reached near the house of the complainant, they saw accused with dandas and were hitting the dandas against the grills of the door. According to PW.5, Gangesh then went towards the house of Anirudh whereas Gautam went towards his house and they all followed Gautam. PW.5 has stated that when they reached near the house of the complainant, they saw accused with dandas and were hitting the dandas against the grills of the door. He has stated that the accused also damaged the wooden gate of the house and in the meantime the complainant and her husband came to the site followed by Nirmala who is his mother. PW.5 has stated that the accused went in the courtyard of the complainant and Ganaba went to inquire with them and at that time the accused no.2 who was behind Ganaba assaulted Ganaba on the back of his head. PW.5 has stated that Bhima, the accused no.1 who was in front also assaulted Ganaba with danda on his head due to which Ganaba suffered bleeding injury and fell on the ground. According to PW.5 when the complainant went to help her husband Ganaba, the accused no. 2 gave a danda blow on her right leg and also abused her by saying “chedi” and then the accused went away with the dandas. Ganaba was then shifted to the hospital. He has stated that his mother, Ronny, he and two or three others accompanied Ganaba up to PHC Kakoda and his mother brought a towel and had covered the wound on the head of said Ganaba with the same. PW.5 has stated that Ganaba was referred to Margao Hospicio Hospital by the PHC Kakoda. He has stated that while returning home they threw the towel that was tied on the head of the injured since there were blood stains on it. He also stated that there were blood stains on his shirt and the maxi of his mother and that the blood was of Ganaba. He has stated that on his shirt a word “JOLLY” was written and that the maxi of his mother was green in colour with flower design on it. He has further stated that both the clothes were attached by the police. He has identified the weapons as well as the said clothes. 22. In his cross-examination, PW.5 has stated that the distance between playing ground and house of the complainant is about 60 metres. He has further stated that both the clothes were attached by the police. He has identified the weapons as well as the said clothes. 22. In his cross-examination, PW.5 has stated that the distance between playing ground and house of the complainant is about 60 metres. He has been confronted with his police statement wherein he has not stated that there was name “JOLLY” printed on his shirt. He has further stated that they had reached the house of the complainant about 20 minutes after they first heard the sound of banging and when they reached the spot, the door of the house of the complainant was closed and there were two persons already at the spot and were watching the incident. He has stated that he does not know as to why the incident has taken place. 23. The prosecution has also examined another person who was playing with PW.5 and others on that play ground. PW.11 has deposed that on 10/06/2006 he was on the foot ball ground playing foot ball between 4.30 to 5.00 p.m. and at that time they heard some shouts from the side of the house of Ganaba and Gautam, the younger brother of Gangesh went to his house to see what had happened and returned back crying and whispered something in the ear of his brother after which both of them went to some other house in the village. He has stated that Ganaba, his wife and four or five others, including mother of Anirudh came running and they also followed them. PW.11 has stated that Bhima was in the courtyard and was hitting the scooter, utensils, gate etc. and accused no. 2 had a bamboo stick in his hand. PW.11 has further stated that Ganaba asked accused no. 2 as to what had happened when suddenly accused no.1 came and hit him from the back side with wooden stick. PW.11 further stated that accused no. 2 then hit Ganaba from the front side and when wife of Ganaba went to intervene she was given bad words like “chedi” etc. and she was also assaulted on her leg. He has stated that he cannot recollect as to who assaulted her. PW.11 further stated that accused no. 2 then hit Ganaba from the front side and when wife of Ganaba went to intervene she was given bad words like “chedi” etc. and she was also assaulted on her leg. He has stated that he cannot recollect as to who assaulted her. According to PW.11 the accused then ran away whereas Ganaba had fallen down with bleeding injury and was shifted to the hospital in a car and mother of Anirudh and he also accompanied them. PW.11 has stated that mother of Anirudh had a towel which was wrapped to the head of Ganaba. According to PW.11, about 10/15 minutes thereafter Gangesh also came to the hospital and informed that he was also assaulted. PW.11 has stated that there was some mark on the face of Gangesh. PW.11 has further stated that Ganaba was taken to the Hospicio hospital from the hospital at Kakoda and therefore they returned back in the car and on the way back, mother of Anirudh threw away the towel which was full of blood, in the river. PW.11 has also identified both the dandas namely MO3 and MO4. 24. In his cross-examination, PW.11 has stated that he had seen only one scooter in the courtyard which had fallen down. He has stated that except for the mark on the face, he did not see any other injury on Gangesh. According to PW.11, after Ganaba came in the courtyard there was discussion between him and the accused for ten minutes and Ganaba was asking as to what was happening. In his cross-examination, PW.11 has stated that Gautam was along with him and was assaulted in his presence. He stated that his shirt was not stained with blood. He has been confronted with his police statement wherein he has stated that his shirt was stained with blood. PW.11 then explained that he had washed his shirt after he returned since there were small stains of blood on it. 25. PW.13 is the son of PW.7 and PW.8. He has deposed that on 10/06/2006 as usual he had returned home from the college at around 6.00 p.m. when his brother Gautam told him that their parents had gone for applying medication to their father. 25. PW.13 is the son of PW.7 and PW.8. He has deposed that on 10/06/2006 as usual he had returned home from the college at around 6.00 p.m. when his brother Gautam told him that their parents had gone for applying medication to their father. PW.13 has deposed that both of them then went to play and he was playing along with Ronny, Anirudh and others whereas his brother was sitting by the side and watching the game. According to PW.13, his brother disappeared and after returning back told him that the accused have came to their house and the accused and their family members have damaged their gate and have thrown down the scooter. He has stated that Gautam called his parents and his father inquired with accused no. 2 as to what they were doing when accused no.1 assaulted his father from behind on the head with a danda and thereafter accused no. 2 gave danda blow from front upon which his father collapsed. PW.13 has deposed that when his mother went to obstruct, the accused no. 2 assaulted her with a danda on her leg. He has deposed that the accused then left the place after which Anirudh, Ronny and his mother put father in their van and took him to hospital. PW.13 has further deposed that vishal and he were then proceeding to the hospital, when both the accused returned and pushed their motorcycle and threw them down. PW.13 has stated that he was further pushed down due to which he fell down and suffered injury on his face. According to PW.13, he somehow managed to get up and went to the hospital on the motorcycle of Vishal and narrated the incident of assault on him to his father. PW.13 has deposed that his father was vomiting blood and therefore was advised to be taken to Margao and accordingly was taken and he returned home. PW.13 has identified the dandas MO3 and MO4. 26. In his cross-examination, PW.13 has stated that he had suffered injuries on his left side near the nose and left eye. He has stated that if there is shout in a loud voice made near his house, it can be heard on the ground. According to him, besides the scooter there was nothing fallen in their courtyard. 26. In his cross-examination, PW.13 has stated that he had suffered injuries on his left side near the nose and left eye. He has stated that if there is shout in a loud voice made near his house, it can be heard on the ground. According to him, besides the scooter there was nothing fallen in their courtyard. He has further stated that his father had slipped from the scooter and had suffered injury to his ankle and therefore during those days he was limping with difficulty to walk. He has stated that police had came to his house on 11/06/2006 during morning hours. 27. PW.13 was examined by PW.14, Doctor Vinod Naik on 10/06/2006 at 8.15 p.m. PW.14 has deposed that on examination hefound three abrasions: one below right eye, second over dorsum of right eye and the third over the lower lip. The Hurt Certificate in respect of PW.13 is at Exhibit 52. The injuries were simple in nature. 28. Thus, three of the eye witnesses namely PW.5, PW.9 and PW.11 are independent witnesses. No suggestion has been put to any of the above witnesses that for particular reason like enmity with the accused persons or friendship with PW.7, PW.8 or PW.13, or for some other reason, they have deposed falsely. They and the accused persons are from the same village and they have no reason to falsely implicate the accused persons. 29. PW.13 has specifically stated that he and Gautam had gone to the playground and that while they were playing Gautam was sitting by the side, watching the game. PW.11 has also stated about the presence of Gautam on the play ground. Though, in his examination-in-chief, PW.5 did not state about Gautam being present initially on the play ground, however, In his crossexamination, PW.5 has admitted that while they were playing football, Gautam was sitting by the side on the ground. He has stated that after hearing the sound, Gautam had gone towards his house. Thus, the missing link which was there in the examination-inchief of PW.5 has been furnished by him in his cross-examination. It cannot be expected that all witnesses will state exactly the same thing. Some omissions are bound to be there depending upon the power of observation and memory of each witness. 30. Thus, the missing link which was there in the examination-inchief of PW.5 has been furnished by him in his cross-examination. It cannot be expected that all witnesses will state exactly the same thing. Some omissions are bound to be there depending upon the power of observation and memory of each witness. 30. PW.3 acted as one of the panch witnesses for the panchanama of scene of offence and the sketch which are at Exhibit 20. He has stated that on 11/06/2006 he and other panch witness by name Ganpat were explained by Ashok Desai of Curchorem Police Station that he wanted to conduct panchanama of the scene. PW.3 has stated that there were two policemen, in uniform, guarding the scene. According to PW.3, the fencing of live and dried bamboos which was around the house was broken and near the entrance a scooter was lying on the ground which was of blue colour and which was slightly damaged. He has stated that one Hero Honda motorcycle was also lying at the spot which was of black and pink colour and its guard was slightly damaged. According to PW.3, there were some scratch marks on the grills of entrance to the house. He has stated that the panchanama was drawn between 8.30 a.m. and 10.00 a.m. There is absolutely nothing in the cross-examination of PW.3 which can cause any dent to the testimony of PW.3 which corroborates the panchanama at Exhibit 20. 31. PW.4 acted as one of the panch witnesses for the panchanama of attachment of the nighty (maxi) of PW.9 and the shirt of PW.5. He has deposed that on 12/06/2006 the panchanama was drawn at Guddemol near the house of Ganaba and one Subhash Palani was the other panch witness and Nirmala who is neighbour was present and she produced one maxi with blood stains which was of light green colour with white flowers. PW.4 has stated that the said maxi was torn on one side. PW.4 has further stated that Nirmala also produced one shirt of her son on which also there were blood stains and it was torn near right arm pit. PW.4 has stated that the said shirt was of pink colour with white lines and there was a mark of tailor on the pocket of that shirt and also a mark on the collar. PW.4 has stated that the said shirt was of pink colour with white lines and there was a mark of tailor on the pocket of that shirt and also a mark on the collar. He has stated that both the clothes were put in separate envelopes, packed and sealed. He has identified his signature on the panchanama which is at Exhibit 23 and he has also identified the said clothes which were shown to him in the Court, after they were taken out from the sealed envelopes sent by C.F.S.L., Hyderabad. A perusal of cross-examination of PW.4 would only reveal that he is a reliable witness. 32. The unchallenged examination report of C.F.S.L., Hyderabad, which is at Exhibit PW.12/B reveals that human blood was detected on the said maxi (nighty) and the said full sleeves shirt, though the group test was not conclusive. 33. PW.6 acted as one of the panch witnesses for the panchanama of attachment of the clothes of PW.7. PW.6 has deposed that on 13/06/2006 police requested him to act as panch witness and that the panchanama was drawn at Bambolim where Mr. Kadam of Curchorem police station asked the nurse to bring the clothes and the nurse came with a box on which a name “Ganba” was written with some other details. He has further deposed that the said box was opened and a shirt with white and red checks was taken out and was shown to him and he found that there were blood stains on the shoulder and collar of the said shirt and it had only one button at the collar and one last button and buttons in the middle were missing. PW.6 has further stated that there was a chocolate colour half pant in the box which was soiled and had some stains of blood. According to PW.6, there was white thread in that half pant. He has stated that both the said clothes were separately put in envelopes which were packed and sealed. He has identified his signature on the attachment panchanama which is at Exhibit 29. He has also identified both the clothes shown to him in the Court. PW.7 has stated that at GMC, he had removed the half sleeves shirt with black and red checks and it was then in the custody of the nurse. He has identified his signature on the attachment panchanama which is at Exhibit 29. He has also identified both the clothes shown to him in the Court. PW.7 has stated that at GMC, he had removed the half sleeves shirt with black and red checks and it was then in the custody of the nurse. According to PW.6, the nurse had brought the box containing the clothes of PW.7. PW.6 has stood firm to the test of cross-examination and there is nothing to render his testimony unreliable. 34. As per the unchallenged examination report of C.F.S.L., Hyderabad which is at Exhibit 48, human blood was detected on the said half sleeves shirt and half pant of the victim Shri Ganaba Desai (PW.7), though group test was not conclusive due to disintegration of blood group specific substances. 35. PW.10 had acted as one of the panch witnesses for the panchanama of recovery of dandas at the instance of accused no.1. He has deposed that sometime in the month of July about 3-4 years back, the accused no.1 was produced before him and another panch witness at Curchorem police station and accused no.1 disclosed that he and accused no. 2 had kept the dandas in the veranda under the scrap. According to PW.10, the said disclosure was made in konkani and was then recorded by Mr. Kadam of Curchorem police station and they have signed the said part of the panchanama. PW.10, then, in detail, has deposed as to how they proceeded to the spot upon accused no.1 leading them by showing directions to proceed. PW.10 has deposed that the accused no.1 took them to the house of Hanuman which house had verandah and roof of asbestos sheets. In that veranda there was scrap material like tyres, tubes etc. and accused no. 1 removed two dandas one wooden and other of bamboo. PW.10 has stated that the said dandas were wrapped in white cloth, their signatures were obtained on the same and the panchanama was completed in which he and other panch witness signed. In his cross-examination, PW.10 has deposed that he does not know what was the telephone number and whether there was any telephone connection to the house of said Hanuman and that he also does not know whether there were any people in that house. In his cross-examination, PW.10 has deposed that he does not know what was the telephone number and whether there was any telephone connection to the house of said Hanuman and that he also does not know whether there were any people in that house. He has stated that he did not see any door to the place where scrap was kept. According to him, Mr. Kadam did not inquire whether there were any occupants in the house and neither any inquiry was made whether the said Hanuman was related to the accused nor an inquiry was made whether the accused no.1 had any relation with that house. He has been confronted with the panchanama wherein it is recorded that both the accused had kept the dandas in the verandah of the house. Even the testimony of PW.10 cannot be said to have been shaken in the cross-examination. 36. PW.16, Ashok Dessai, the then Assistant Sub Inspector of Curchorem police station recorded the oral report of Sapana Desai on 11/06/2006 in GMC, Bambolim. He has identified his signature on that report which is at Exhibit 36. He registered the offence under Section 326, 447, 427, 323 and 504 of I.P.C. and then proceeded to the scene of offence and drew the panchanama of the scene of offence and also the sketch which are at Exhibit 20. PW.14 has deposed that a motorcycle and a scooter were seen lying on the ground and the compound wall which was a wooden fencing was damaged. He has confirmed that on 12/06/2006 he attached the blood stained nighty of Nirmala and shirt of her son Anirudh. In his cross-examination, PW.16 has deposed that on 10/06/2006 at about 8.00 p.m. he recorded the statement of Ganaba-PW7. He has stated that there after he recorded the N.C. no. 180/06 at Curchorem Police Station. A copy of the said NC complaint is at Exh. 57. In his cross-examination, PW.16 has stated that the motorcycle and the scooter had received some scratches and the guard of the vehicle no. GA 02-6589 was damaged. Further, he has added that there were no blood stains at the scene of offence. 37. PW.12, Vincent Paes, who was Police Inspector of Curchorem police station at the relevant time, had addressed a letter of request to the Medical Superintendent, Goa Medical College to issue final medical certificate. GA 02-6589 was damaged. Further, he has added that there were no blood stains at the scene of offence. 37. PW.12, Vincent Paes, who was Police Inspector of Curchorem police station at the relevant time, had addressed a letter of request to the Medical Superintendent, Goa Medical College to issue final medical certificate. He has produced the final medicolegal certificate as Exhibit PW.12/A. He has deposed that he forwarded the sealed envelopes to the Superintendent, Crime Branch for getting C.F.S.L. report. He has produced all the correspondence of forwarding the articles to the C.F.S.L., Hyderabad and he has also produced the reports of examination of C.F.S.L. one as Exhibit 48 and the other as PW.12/B. The reports of C.F.S.L. have not been challenged. 38. PW.1 Vishal Gadhe is the owner of the motorcycle bearing registration no. GA-02-M-6687 and he has deposed that on 10/06/2006 about two years back when he was at his house, at about 7.00 p.m., Gangesh Desai came running to him and requested for his motorcycle and when asked as to why he wanted the motorcycle, Gangesh told him that his father was assaulted by the accused with dandas and bamboos. According to PW.1, Gangesh had also suffered some injuries to his face. PW.1 has stated that Gangesh told him that he wanted to go to the hospital on his motorcycle. In his cross-examination, PW.1 has deposed that Gangesh had scratch injuries on the right side of his face. 39. PW.2 Dr. Clare had examined the blood of PW.7 and found that the blood group was 'B' Rh Positive. The report issued by PW.2 is at Exhibit 17. 40. Lastly, PW.17 Gurudas Kadam. the then Police Inspector of Curchorem police station, conducted the investigation. Inter alia, he has deposed that both the accused persons were arrested on 05/07/2006 and on the same day he conducted recovery panchanama in presence of two panch witnesses namely Santosh Naik and Sunil Dalvi and the accused Prakash Wadar disclosed that the weapons were concealed in the verandah of the house of Shri Hanumanta at Guddemol Sanvordem. PW.17 has further deposed that the disclosure was made in Konkani and was recorded in the panchanama in the same language. PW.17 has further deposed that the disclosure was made in Konkani and was recorded in the panchanama in the same language. PW.17 has stated that one danda and one bamboo were recovered at the instance of the accused Prakash Wadar which was concealed below the scrap material in the verandah of the house of Shri Hanumanta at Guddemol. PW.17 has stated that the said dandas were attached and sealed under the said panchanama which is at Exhibit 40. He has identified the dandas MO3 and MO4. 41. In the case of “Sukhdev Yadav and others Vs. State of Bihar” [ (2001) 8 SCC 86 ], the Apex Court has held that the Court can sift the chaff from the grain and find out the truth from the testimony of the witnesses. The evidence is to be considered from the point of view of trustworthiness and once the same stands satisfied, it ought to inspire confidence in the mind of the Court to accept the stated evidence. The Apex Court has observed that there would hardly be a witness whose evidence does not contain some amount of exaggeration or embellishment. Sometimes there would be a deliberate attempt to offer the same and sometimes the witnesses in their over anxiety to do better from the witness box detail out an exaggerated account. 42. In the case of “State of U. P. Vs. M. K. Anthony” ( AIR 1985 S.C. 48 ), the Apex Court has held thus: “While appreciating the evidence of a witness, the approach must be whether the evidence of the witness read as a whole appears to have a ring of truth. Once that impression is formed, it is undoubtedly necessary for the court to scrutinize the evidence more particularly keeping in view the deficiencies, draw-backs and infirmities pointed out in the evidence as a whole and evaluate them to find out whether it is against the general tenor of the evidence given by the witness and whether the earlier evaluation of the evidence is shaken as to render it unworthy of belief. Minor discrepancies on trivial matters not touching the core of the case, hyper-technical approach by taking sentences torn out of context here or there from the evidence, attaching importance to some technical error committed by the investigating officer not going to the root of the matter would not ordinarily permit rejection of the evidence as a whole. If the court before whom the witness gives evidence had the opportunity to form the opinion about the general tenor of evidence given by the witness, the appellate court which had not this benefit will have to attach due weight to the appreciation of evidence by the trial court and unless there are reasons weighty and formidable it would not be proper to reject the evidence on the ground of minor variations or infirmities in the matter of trivial details. Even honest and truthful witnesses may differ in some details unrelated to the main incident because power of observation, retention and reproduction differ with individuals. Cross examination is an unequal duel between a rustic and refined lawyer.” 43. In the case of “Rammi Vs. State of M. P.” [ (1999)8 S.C.C. 649 ], the Apex Court has observed as follows: “24. When an eyewitness is examined at length it is quite possible for him to make some discrepancies. No true witness can possibly escape from making some discrepant details. Perhaps an untrue witness who is well tutored can successfully make his testimony totally non-discrepant. But courts should bear in mind that it is only when discrepancies in the evidence of a witness are so incompatible with the credibility of his version that the court is justified in jettisoning his evidence. But too serious a view to be adopted on mere variations falling in the narration of an incident (either as between the evidence of two witnesses or as between two statements of the same witness) is an unrealistic approach for judicial scrutiny.” 44. From the entire evidence on record it can be seen that there is consistent and reliable evidence of eye witnesses namely PW.5, PW.7, PW.8, PW.9, PW.11 and PW.13. There appears to be a ring of truth in their evidence. It is seen from the impugned judgment that the learned trial Court had stretched the evidence too much in order to find out inconsistencies. There appears to be a ring of truth in their evidence. It is seen from the impugned judgment that the learned trial Court had stretched the evidence too much in order to find out inconsistencies. Hyper-technical approach appears to have been taken by the trial Court by attaching importance to some minor inconsistencies and infirmities and to trivial details. In our view, the said inconsistencies which have been pointed out by the trial Court are negligible in nature which do not cause any dent to the evidence on record. 45. Admittedly, the accused persons were known to the eye witnesses since all are from the same village. Merely because there was some discrepancy about the description of the weapons used by the accused nos. 1 and 2, as to whether accused no.1 was armed with wooden danda and accused no. 2 was armed with a bamboo danda or vice versa, or whether they were poles (Khuts) used for fencing, etc., the learned trial Court has held that neither the complainant nor the injured or any of the witnesses could have made mistake in identifying the accuses persons since they all are well acquainted with the accused. In fact there is absolutely no mistake in identifying the accused persons though there is some mistake in stating as to who had bamboo danda and who had wooden danda. Human beings cannot be expected to exactly memorize the exact nature of the weapon and accordingly depose in the Court after a period of time, more particularly when the weapons are dandas or the like. Such small mistakes are bound to be overlooked. In fact, if everything was stated exactly in the same manner by all the witnesses, then there would have been a doubt about their truthfulness. It should be kept in mind that in addition to the corroboration by eye witnesses, there is corroborating medical evidence with regard to the injuries sustained by the victims. 46. There is no dispute that when article recovered under Section 27 of the Evidence Act is not immediately sealed, no value can be attached to such recovery. In this regard reliance has been placed by the learned trial Court in the case of “Ravindra @Ravi Kumar Vs. State”, [2000(1) Goa L.T. 133] and also some other cases. 46. There is no dispute that when article recovered under Section 27 of the Evidence Act is not immediately sealed, no value can be attached to such recovery. In this regard reliance has been placed by the learned trial Court in the case of “Ravindra @Ravi Kumar Vs. State”, [2000(1) Goa L.T. 133] and also some other cases. However, the learned trial Court has failed to see that in those cases admittedly the recovered articles were not attached under a seal. In the present case, it is true that PW.10 has not stated that the dandas were sealed in his presence. But, it should be kept in mind that the panchanama of recovery which is at Exhibit 40 specifically mentions that the danda and the bamboo were wrapped in a white colour cloth separately and hand-stitched and vax seals were fixed on the stitching lines having the impression of Police Inspector, Curchorem police station. PW.17, the Investigating Officer, who conducted the said panchanama, has corroborated the said panchanama and has stated that both the dandas were sealed and attached. Besides the above, the examination report of C.F.S.L., Hyderabad, which is at Exhibit 48 and which has not been challenged by the accused persons, duly mentions that the said bamboo danda (Exh. 3) and the said wooden danda (Exh. 4) were in sealed cloth parcels having a seal and impression of Police Inspector, Curchorem police station. It is true that as per the examination report of C.F.S.L., no blood could be detected on the said dandas. However, the fact remains that the said two dandas have been duly identified by all the eye witnesses to be weapons of assault used by the accused persons. The accused persons were arrested on 5/7/2006 and the recovery was effected on the same day. In such circumstances, in our view, the learned trial Court has committed gross error in totally discarding the said recovery panchanama. 47. Merely because at the scene of offence, the Investigating Officer did not find any blood stains, the learned trial Court has held that an inference can be drawn that either Shri Ganaba had not suffered bleeding injury at the alleged scene of incident or that the Investigating Officer did not take pains to see blood stains at the spot of incident. Since the eye witnesses have deposed that injuries of Ganaba were severely bleeding and his face was covered with blood, according to trial Court, it is difficult to believe that not a drop would fall on the ground. The above are mere inferences by way of surmises and conjunctures, not borne out from the records. The fact is that PW.9 had covered the wound of Ganaba with a towel. Further fact is that PW.8 has stated the the blood from injuries of Ganaba had not fallen on the ground. Lastly, the fact is that the then Assistant Sub-Inspector Ashok (PW.16) has clearly stated that there were no blood stains on the ground. The trial Court does not appear to have taken into consideration the facts that there was scooter with damages fallen at the spot; wooden fencing at the entrance was damaged; utensils were scattered in the courtyard; and the grills of the entrance was damaged. Merely because no blood stains were found at the spot, that does not mean that no incident had occurred on the said spot. It is true that collection of blood stained earth is an important piece of evidence which helps to fix the place of assault, as observed by the learned trial Court. However, if no blood at all had fallen on the earth, the question of collection of blood from the spot does not arise. If wanted, the Investigating Officer could have manipulated the site by sprinkling blood at the spot, which has not been done in the present case. The blood stained towel was thrown in the river and hence there was no possibility of recovering the same. It appears that the learned trial Court has searched the records only to find out as to what is not there in the case of the prosecution without considering as to what positive evidence is existing on record. 48. The learned trial Court held that the prosecution ought to have proved as to what was the motive in committing the offence and that the prosecution has failed to prove the said motive. The present case is not a case based solely on circumstantial evidence in order to make motive to play an important role. In the present case, there are various eyewitnesses and hence even if the motive is not proved, the same does not make any difference. 49. The present case is not a case based solely on circumstantial evidence in order to make motive to play an important role. In the present case, there are various eyewitnesses and hence even if the motive is not proved, the same does not make any difference. 49. We are aware of limits to interfere with the judgment of acquittal. There is no doubt that if there are two possible views and one such view is taken by the trial Court, then the High Court cannot interfere with the judgment of acquittal only because it is inclined to accept the other view. In our view, the evidence on record, beyond reasonable doubt, proves that both the accused persons had assaulted PW.7, PW.8 and even PW.13. It is also proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused persons had caused grievous injury to PW.7. It is further proved that the accused had committed mischief by damaging the scooter, wooden fencing and the grills of the entrance of the house of PW.7. However, as has been rightly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the accused persons, Section 307 of I.P.C. will not be applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case. In order that Section 307 should be applied, the offender should have an intention of causing death or intention to cause bodily injury which he knows to be likely to cause death of the said person or is sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death or an injury which is so eminently dangerous that it would in all probability cause death. In the present case, there is no evidence to prove that the accused persons had such an intention. However, since grievous hurt has been caused by the accused persons to PW.7, by means of dandas, they are guilty of the offence punishable under Section 325 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. Since simple injury has been caused by the accused persons to PW.8 and to PW.13, the accused persons are also guilty of the offence punishable under Section 323 of I.P.C. As it is proved that the accused persons had trespassed into the land belonging to and in possession of PW.7 and PW.8, the offence punishable under Section 447 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. is also proved. Similarly, since the accused have committed mischief, the offence under Section 427 read with 34 of I.P.C. is proved. Similarly, since the accused have committed mischief, the offence under Section 427 read with 34 of I.P.C. is proved. It may be stated that the evidence on record is not sufficient to prove the offence punishable under Section 504 of I.P.C. The accused persons are guilty of offences punishable under Sections 325, 323, 447, 427 read with 34 of I.P.C. 50. The impugned judgment and order of acquittal is therefore not sustainable and is liable to be quashed and set aside as the same is perverse. The accused persons are liable to be convicted and sentenced, accordingly as above. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the sentence which follows, in our view, is adequate. 51. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. (a) The impugned judgment and order is quashed and set aside. (b) The accused persons are held guilty and convicted of the offence punishable under Sections 325, 323, 447, 427 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. (c) Each one of the accused persons is sentenced for the offence under Section 325 r/w. Section 34 of I.P.C. to under go imprisonment for a period of one year and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-in default to under go simple imprisonment for a further period of three months. (d) Each one of the accused persons is sentenced for the offence under Section 323 r/w. Section 34 of I.P.C to under go imprisonment for a period of one month and also to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-in default to under go simple imprisonment for a further period of fifteen days. (e) Each one of the accused persons is sentenced for the offence under Section 427 r/w. Section 34 of I.P.C to under go imprisonment for a period or one month and also to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-in default to under go simple imprisonment for a further period of fifteen days. (f) Each one of the accused persons is sentenced for the offence under Section 447 r/w. Section 34 of I.P.C to under go imprisonment for a period or one month and also to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-in default to under go simple imprisonment for a further period of fifteen days. (g) All the substantive sentences shall run concurrently. (h) The period during which the accused persons remained in custody shall be set off in terms of Section 428 of Cr. 500/-in default to under go simple imprisonment for a further period of fifteen days. (g) All the substantive sentences shall run concurrently. (h) The period during which the accused persons remained in custody shall be set off in terms of Section 428 of Cr. P.C. (i) If the fine amount is recovered, an amount of Rs. 3000/-shall be paid to PW.7 and PW.8, as compensation. (j) All muddemal properties shall be destroyed after a period of 90 days from today. (k) Both the accused persons shall surrender before the trial Court within 30 days from today to under go sentence imposed upon them.