JUDGMENT Kailash Prasad Deo, J. - Heard, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, assisted by Mr. Rohit Agarawal, Advocates and Mr. Pravin Kumar Appu, Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State. 2. The instant criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, both dated 16.09.2005, passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Deoghar, in Sessions Trial No.55 of 1996/37 of 2005, whereby all the four appellants have been convicted for the offence committed and punishable under Sections 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code and awarded rigorous imprisonment for six months with a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine further imprisonment for one month. By the same impugned judgment learned trial court has acquitted the appellants of the charge, under Sections 324, 326, 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is based upon fardbayen of Dahru Mahto (P.W.-3), recorded in presence of co-villager Bharat Mahto (P.W.-1) and Chigar Mahto (P.W.-2), in injured condition, before the officer in-charge of Sarath Police Station, wherein the informant has alleged, that because of heavy rain fall, wall of his house had fallen down and the soil has been accumulated over the land of Kapil Mahto. At around 7.00 A.M., when informant was removing the soil, from the land of Kapil Mahto, the co-villagers namely Kapil Mahto, Nawal Mahto, Gohan Mahto and Sudhir Mahto, all sons of Late Tiro Mahto, came there having lathi, tangi and barcha in their hands and started abusing the informant and asked the informant, that why he is taking soil, upon which the informant replied, that these soil belongs to him, as part of the fallen wall of the house and also requested the appellants not to abuse him, upon which the Kapil Mahto, having tangi, has assaulted the informant on his head causing bleeding injury. Sudhir Mahto, having barcha, has assaulted the informant on his left hand causing injury. Nawal Mahto and Gohan Mahto assaulted the informant below the elbow by means of lathi causing injury. When the cousin of informant, Chigar Mahto, (P.W.-2) came for rescue, he was also assaulted by Nawal Mahto with lathi, on his head causing injury. 4. On the basis of fardbeyan police registered Sarath P.S. Case No.105 of 1993, dated 16.09.1993, under Sections 324, 323, 307 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. When the cousin of informant, Chigar Mahto, (P.W.-2) came for rescue, he was also assaulted by Nawal Mahto with lathi, on his head causing injury. 4. On the basis of fardbeyan police registered Sarath P.S. Case No.105 of 1993, dated 16.09.1993, under Sections 324, 323, 307 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. After investigation, the police submitted charge sheet vide charge sheet no.61 of 1993, dated 31.10.1993, under Sections 324, 323, 307, 326 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code, against all the four accused persons. The cognizance of the offence has been taken vide order dated 20.12.1993 and the case has been committed to the court of sessions vide order dated 11.03.1996. 6. The charge has been framed against the appellants under Sections 326, 504/34, 307, 323 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code, on 07.03.1998, to which the accused persons have pleaded their innocence and thus, they were put under trial. 7. The prosecution, to prove its case, has examined altogether three witnesses and adduced documentary evidences. P.W.-1 is Bharat Mahto, P.W.-2 is Chigar Mahto, cousin of the informant and P.W.-3 is Dahru Mahto, informant of the case. Signature of Bharat Mahto, on the fardbeyan, has been proved and marked as Exhibit-1, signature of Chigu Mahto, on the fardbeyan, has been proved and marked as Exhibit-1/1 and signature of Dahru Mahto. on the fardbeyan, has been proved and marked as Exhibit-2. 8. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the appellants/accused persons have been recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C., on 05.03.2005, to which they pleaded, that false allegation has been levelled against them and they are innocent. 9. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and from the material available on record, the learned trial court has passed the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence against these appellants namely, Kapil Mahto @ Kapildeo Mahto, Nawal Mahto, Gohan Mahto and Sudhir Mahto. Being aggrieved at and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence the appellants have preferred the instant criminal appeal before this Hon''ble Court, assailing the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. 10. Heard, learned counsel for the appellants Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, assisted by Mr. Rohit Agrawal, Advocates. Being aggrieved at and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence the appellants have preferred the instant criminal appeal before this Hon''ble Court, assailing the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. 10. Heard, learned counsel for the appellants Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, assisted by Mr. Rohit Agrawal, Advocates. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted, that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence is bad in law and cannot sustain in the eyes of law. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, that the investigating officer and medical officer, who has examined the victim, Dahru Mahto and Chigar Mahto, have not been examined in this case and the appellants have seriously been prejudiced for non-examination of investigating officer and medical officer. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, that nonexamination of investigating officer has caused serious prejudiced to the appellants, as the appellants could not get an opportunity to cross-examine the investigating officer to elucidate the fact with respect to the place and manner of occurrence to prove their innocence. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, the signatures of the witnesses, on the fardbeyan have been proved and marked as Exhibits-1, 2 and 3 but contents of the fardbeyan has not been exhibited in this case. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, that the injury report has not been brought on record nor the victims have shown the injuries caused upon them, before the learned Court. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, that by the same impugned judgment the learned trial court has acquitted the appellants of the charge under Sections 324, 326, 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code but has wrongly convicted the appellants, under Sections 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, without having any material on record and as such, perverse finding given by the learned trial court be set aside. 11. Heard, Mr. Pravin Kumar Appu, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State. Learned counsel for the State has submitted, that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence is based on the material available on record and the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants under Sections 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 11. Heard, Mr. Pravin Kumar Appu, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State. Learned counsel for the State has submitted, that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence is based on the material available on record and the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants under Sections 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the State has further submitted, that the non-examination of the investigating officer and medical officer has caused no prejudice to the appellants. The appellants have rightly been convicted under Sections 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the state has further submitted, that the signatures on the fardbeyan have been legally proved under law. Learned counsel for the State has further submitted, that learned trial court, after due appreciation of the evidence, has acquitted the appellants under Sections 324, 326, 307 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, but rightly convicted the appellants, under Sections 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the State has further submitted, that this Court may not interfere in the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence as the same is based on the evidence brought on record. 12. Heard, learned counsel for the appellants Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, assisted by Mr. Rohit Agrawal, Advocates and Mr. Pravin Kumar Appu, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and perused the record i.e. fardbeyan, charge report, evidence of three witnesses, exhibits and the statement of the appellants recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. From perusal of the evidence on record, this Court has found that the evidence of P.W.-1 (Bharat Mahto), P.W.-2 (Chigar Mahto) and P.W.-3 (Dahru Mahto) are consistent to the fardbeyan and P.W.-2, Chigar Mahto and P.W.-3, Dharu Mahto, informant of the case, are injured persons, who have been assaulted by the accused persons of this case. From perusal of the evidence, it appears that the injuries, which have been caused by the appellants are in complete consonance with the allegations made in the first informant report, as Kapildeo Mahto has assaulted that the informant by means of tangi, on his head, Nawal Mahto and Gohan Mahto has assaulted the informant by means of lathi, below the elbow, Sudhir Mahto has assaulted the informant by means of barcha, on left hand and P.W.-2 Chigar Mahto has been assaulted by means of lathi by Nawal Mahto. These facts are consistent with all the prosecution witnesses, which is in complete consonance with the first information report. The defence has cross-examined the witnesses but nothing has been elucidated to disbelieve the prosecution case. Under the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the opinion, that the conviction of the appellants, under Sections 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, is based on material available on record and as such, the same is upheld and affirmed by this Hon''ble Court. 13. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted, that the case has been instituted in the month of September, 1993 and approximately 25 years has lapsed and the dispute was regarding a trivial issue, with respect to the soil, which was taken by the informant from the land of the appellants, belongs to the wall of the informant, which has fallen because of the heavy rain. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, that considering the nature of the offence and the rigors of trial, which appellants have faced, instead of sending them to jail after approximately 25 years, the appellants may be imposed with fine. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, that sending jail to the appellants may disturb the social harmony between the parties, as they are co-villagers. Learned counsel for the State has no objection in this regard. 14. This Court is of the opinion, that instead of sending jail to these appellants, after facing rigors of trial for about 25 years, they are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1000/- each, instead of payment of fine Rs. 500/- as imposed by the learned trial court as period already undergone by the appellants is sufficient. As such, the instant criminal appeal is dismissed with modification in sentence part, as period already undergone by the appellants and appellants are directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1000/- each before the learned trial court within 12 weeks from today, failing with the appellants will served the sentence, as directed by the learned trial court, of rigorous imprisonment for six months under Sections 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. 1000/- each before the learned trial court within 12 weeks from today, failing with the appellants will served the sentence, as directed by the learned trial court, of rigorous imprisonment for six months under Sections 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned trial court is directed to issue notice to these appellants to deposit the said amount, on refusal of the same or non-compliance of the same, the learned trial court will secure their attendance for serving out the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for six months as directed by the learned trial court. The appellants are directed to deposit the aforesaid amount within a period of 12 weeks from today, failing which necessary action will be taken by the learned trial court. 15. The appellants, who are on bail, their bail bonds are hereby cancelled to comply the order passed by this Hon''ble Court. 16. In the result, the instant criminal appeal is dismissed with modification in sentence. 17. Let the lower court record be sent along with a copy of this judgment to the court concerned, at once for necessary action. 18. Let the copy of judgment be communicated through ''FAX'' at the cost of the appellants.