JUDGMENT : A.R. JOSHI, J. 1. Heard rival submissions on this Criminal Appeal preferred by the State of Maharashtra challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 5.3.2004 passed by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Miraj in R.C.C. No. 14 of 1999. By the impugned judgment and order all the three respondents/original accused were acquitted under offence punishable under section 324 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. Being aggrieved by the said acquittal State had preferred the present appeal. The brief fact of the case are as under:- The incident of assault on the complainant PW-2 Shrikant and his real brother PW-1 Chandrakant occurred at night of 6.12.1998. It so happened in the house of the complainant at about 8.30 p.m. On that night PW-4 Shevantabai mother of First Informant was inside the house cooking food. That time she heard the noise and collusion during which the present respondents abused her son Chandrakant and there was a sort of quarrel outside the house. She came out and witnessed that her son Chandrakant PW-1 was assaulted by respondent accused No. 3 Vishal by means of knife on his back. She asked her son to lodge a complaint and initially accompanied him to the Police Station. However, according to her, on the way she came back to her house and that time her another son Shrikant PW-2 had also arrived at the house. That time she noticed that her son Shrikant was assaulted by respondent accused No. 2 Kondiba by means of iron pipe on his head and shoulders. She also witnessed that Shrikant was assaulted by accused No. 3 by kicks and fist blows. Thereafter, she and PW-2 Shrikant went to Police Station. Police recorded the complaint of PW-2 Shrikant and registered offence against present respondents accused for the offence punishable under Section 324 r/w. 34 of I.P.C. Alongwith Yadi both the injured PW-1 and 2 were sent for medical examination. Initially, they were sent to Miraj Hospital and from there PW-2 Shrikant was sent to Hospital at Sangli. PW-7 Dr. Shirish Joshi who was then attached to Miraj Civil Hospital as Medical Officer, examined both the witnesses. At this juncture, the injuries sustained by said PW-1 and 2 and as noticed by Dr. Joshi PW-7 can be mentioned as under:- Injuries to PW-2 Shrikant:- 1. Tenderness over both shoulders joints. 2. Contused lacerated wound over frontal bone on head. Shirish Joshi who was then attached to Miraj Civil Hospital as Medical Officer, examined both the witnesses. At this juncture, the injuries sustained by said PW-1 and 2 and as noticed by Dr. Joshi PW-7 can be mentioned as under:- Injuries to PW-2 Shrikant:- 1. Tenderness over both shoulders joints. 2. Contused lacerated wound over frontal bone on head. Dimensions 4 x 2 c.m. there was bleeding. Age of injury within 24 hrs. Injuries sustained by Chandrakant PW-1 are:- 1. Incised wound at L-1 level, left paraspilal area, measuring 3 x 2 x 1 c.m. Age of the injury within 24 hours, cause of injury may be by hard and sharp object. 2. It is also the case of prosecution that on the same night a complaint was also lodged by the present respondents for alleged assault by father and sisters of PW-1 and 2. After registering the offence against present respondents on the complaint of PW-2 Shrikant, investigation was started during which spot panchnama was conducted in presence of one panch PW-3 Youraj Kamble. During investigation present respondents accused were arrested on 14.12.1998 and according to the Investigating Officer, PW-6 Mr. Subhash Kadam, accused Nos. 1 and 2 respectively made voluntary statements and respectively produced knife and iron pipe. These articles were taken charge of under the panchnama during which PW-5 one panch witness Dadapeer Aminsaheb Mujawar took part. At this juncture, it must be mentioned that said PW-5 had turned hostile and denied that any such recovery was made in his presence by respective accused persons. On completion of investigation, after recording of the statements of the witnesses, the charge-sheet was filed. 3. During trial, seven prosecution witnesses were examined. Out of them important witnesses are PW-1, 2 and 4. PW-1 and 2 are injured themselves and PW-4 is their mother. Their substantive evidence was correctly examined by the Trial Court in the light of the Medical Officer of PW-7 Dr. Shirish Joshi. It is observed that the Trial Court had considered the answers given by PW-7 Dr. Joshi, during his cross-examination that the injuries sustained by PW-1 and 2 could have been possible by fall on the road and also fall on the hard and sharp object. Shirish Joshi. It is observed that the Trial Court had considered the answers given by PW-7 Dr. Joshi, during his cross-examination that the injuries sustained by PW-1 and 2 could have been possible by fall on the road and also fall on the hard and sharp object. Also it is seen that the Trial Court had critically examined mainly the substantive evidence of PW-4 Smt. Shevanta and entertained doubt as to why there was any occasion for her to leave the company of her son Chandrakant while proceeding towards the Police Station. According to this witness, on the way to the Police Station, she abandoned the company of her son Chandrakant and came back home and that time, she noticed the assault on her another son Shrikant. This substantive evidence of PW-4 Shevanta raised genuine doubt as to why there was occasion for her to come back, leaving her injured son while on the way to the Police Station. In the considered view of this Court, this evidence of PW-1, 2 and 4 has been rightly examined and raising doubt as to whether these witnesses are giving true and correct version of the events. This is more so in the light of the admitted position that there was a civil dispute between the three respondents on one side and PW-1 and 2 and their family members on the other side. This dispute was over the immovable landed property and which was going on for more than 7 to 8 years prior to the incident. It is also an admitted position that there was a complaint lodged by the respondents accused against the relatives of the First Informant. Pointing out this factual position and reasonable doubt was entertained by the Trial Court as to possibility of false involvement of the respondents in the offence charged. Considering the substantive evidence of PW-7 Dr. Joshi and mainly considering hostility shown of PW-5 as to alleged recovery from respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and considering that the independent witness Appasaheb Waghmare is not examined, it must be said that the Trial Court had rightly came to the conclusion as to non establishment of the charge levelled against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. In that event, there is nothing to entertain the present appeal so as to alter or set aside the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. In that event, there is nothing to entertain the present appeal so as to alter or set aside the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. Hence, present criminal appeal is dismissed and accordingly disposed of. The bail bonds of the respondents accused shall stand cancelled. Appeal Dismissed.