JUDGMENT Kailash Prasad Deo, J. - Heard, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary assisted by Mr. Rohit Agrawal, Advocates and learned counsel for the State, Md. Azeemuddin, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. 2. The instant Criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, both dated 17.02.2004, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. V, Deoghar, in Sessions Case No. 45 of 2002, whereby, these appellants have been convicted for the offence committed and punishable under Sections 148 and 324/149 of the Indian Penal Code and awarded Rigorous Imprisonment for one year under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code to all appellants and Rigorous Imprisonment for two years under Section 324/149 of the Indian Penal Code along with a fine of Rs.1,000/- each. Except appellant no.1 and in default of payment of fine the accused persons will have to undergo a further imprisonment of three months. Appellant no.1 Mukhtar Mian has been awarded rigorous imprisonment for three years under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code along with fine amount of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine will further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. Originally fourteen accused/appellants have preferred the present criminal appeal but during the pendency of the appeal, appellant No.1 Mukhtar Mian, appellant No.7 Abbas Mian and appellant No.10 Nazam Mian @ Nizam Mian died and their criminal appeal has been abated by this Hon''ble Court and as such, the present criminal appeal is being heard, so far surviving eleven appellants are concerned. 3. The prosecution case, is based upon, written report submitted by Mazid Mian (P.W.4) recorded by officer-in-charge, Madhupur Police Station, in the district of Deoghar, on 16.08.2001, wherein, the informant has stated, that today i.e. on 16.08.2001 at about 8.00 A.M.- 9.00 A.M co-villagers Mukhtar Mian, Nasim Mian, Rafique Mian, Jamruddin Mian, Samru Mian, Abbas Mian, Sahwan Mian, Rahman Mian, Nijam Mian, Nayim Mian, Mannan Mian, Siraj Mian, Safruddin Mian and Akhtar Mian, after forming an unlawful assembly came to the door of the informant and started abusing him. Upon being objected by the informant, all the aforesaid accused persons jointly assaulted informant, his wife Aisa Khatoon, his son Nasir Mian @ Nasruddin Mian and Nazra Khatoon wife of Nasir Mian with lathi, rod and tangi causing injuries. Upon being objected by the informant, all the aforesaid accused persons jointly assaulted informant, his wife Aisa Khatoon, his son Nasir Mian @ Nasruddin Mian and Nazra Khatoon wife of Nasir Mian with lathi, rod and tangi causing injuries. It is alleged that, occurrence took place because of land dispute and litigation pending in the court. The accused persons have also taken away Rs.6000/- from a box kept inside the house. 4. On the basis of the written report of the informant, the Police has registered First Information Report bearing Madhupur, P.S. Case No. 150 of 2001, dated 16.08.2001, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 448, 380 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code against the fourteen named accused/appellants. 5. After investigation, the police has submitted charge sheet vide charge sheet no. 220 of 2001, dated 30.08.2001, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 448, 307, 380 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code against the fourteen named accused/appellants. 6. The cognizance of the offence has been taken vide order dated 29.09.2001 and the case has been committed to the Court of Sessions vide order dated 31.01.2002. 7. The learned trial Court has framed charge against fourteen named accused/ appellants, on 23.09.2002, under Sections 148, 341, 307/149, 380 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code, to which the appellants have pleaded their innocence and thus, they were put under trial. 8. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined altogether six prosecution witnesses and also exhibited documentary evidence. Nasir Mian @ Nasruddin Mian has been examined as P.W.1, Aisa Khatoon has been examined as P.W.2, Tahjun Khatoon has been examined as P.W.3, Mazid Mian (informant of the case) has been examined as P.W.4, Dr. Naresh Prasad Sinha (Medical Officer) has been examined as P.W.5 and Bharat Singh (investigating officer) has been examined as P.W.6. Nasir Mian @ Nasruddin Mian has been examined as P.W.1, Aisa Khatoon has been examined as P.W.2, Tahjun Khatoon has been examined as P.W.3, Mazid Mian (informant of the case) has been examined as P.W.4, Dr. Naresh Prasad Sinha (Medical Officer) has been examined as P.W.5 and Bharat Singh (investigating officer) has been examined as P.W.6. Signature of Mazid Mian, (P.W.4) on fardbeyan has been proved and marked as exhibit-1, injury report of Nasir Mian @ Nasruddin Mian,(P.W.1) has been proved and marked as exhibit-2, injury report of Aisa Khatoon(P.W.2) has been proved and marked as exhibit-2/1, injury report of Nazra Khatoon has been proved and marked as exhibit-2/2, injury report of Mazid Mian(P.W.4) has been proved and marked as exhibit-2/3, endorsement of officer-in-charge on the fardbeyan has been proved and marked as exhibit-3, formal First Information Report has been proved and marked as exhibit- 3/1, police requisition for Medical examination of Nasir Mian @ Nasruddin Mian has been proved and marked as exhibits-4, police requisition for medical examination of Aisa Khatoon has been proved and marked as exhibit-4/1, police requisition for medical examination of Nazra Khatoon has been proved and marked as exhibit-5 and police requisition for Medical examination of Mazid Mian (informant) has been proved and marked as exhibit-5/1. 9. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the statement of the appellants have been recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., on 08.01.2004, to which the appellants have pleaded their innocence and stated that they have falsely been implicated in this case. 10. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on the basis of materials available on record, learned trial Court has passed the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. Being aggrieved at and dissatisfied with the same, the present criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellants before this Hon''ble Court, assailing the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. 11. 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. 11. 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 appellants have been convicted for offence committed and punishable under Sections 148 and 324/149 of the Indian Penal Code, though the charge has not been framed under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, rather it has been framed, vide order dated 23.09.2002, under Sections 148, 341, 307/149, 380 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code. 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 448 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, that from perusal of the First Information Report, it appears that, parties were in litigating terms and civil dispute and civil suit was pending between the parties. Under the aforesaid background the appellants cannot be convicted by the learned trial Court for the offence committed and punishable under Sections 148 and 324/149 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the appellants has further submitted, that Dr. Naresh Prasad Sinha (Medical Officer), who has been examined as P.W.5 has treated Nasir Mian @ Nasruddin Mian (P.W.1) on 16.08.2001 and proved injury report of Nasir Mian @ Nasruddin Mian, which has been marked as exhibit-2. The doctor has found two injuries on the person of Nasir Mian @ Nasruddin Mian:- 1. one incised wound middle of the head 2"x 1/ 8"x1/8". 2. one abrasion with erythmatus base on right clavicle 1/4"x 1/4". Both the injuries are simple in nature, injury no.1 has been caused by sharp cut weapon, injury no.2 has been caused by hard and blunt substance. The doctor has also examined Aisa Khatoon(P.W.2) and found three injuries on her person:- 1. One bruise with pain above left elbow joint 3"x1 /2". 2. One incised wound on the dorsum of right hand 1"x 1 / 8" x 1/8". 3. One scratch wound on right knee joint 1"x1 / 16"x1 /16". Injury no.1 & 3 are simple caused by hard and blunt substance and injury no.2 is simple caused by sharp cut weapon like tangi. 2. One incised wound on the dorsum of right hand 1"x 1 / 8" x 1/8". 3. One scratch wound on right knee joint 1"x1 / 16"x1 /16". Injury no.1 & 3 are simple caused by hard and blunt substance and injury no.2 is simple caused by sharp cut weapon like tangi. The doctor P.W.5 has also examined, Nazra Khatoon and has found two injuries:- 1. Swelling with pain on left knee joint 1"x1". 2. Swelling with pain on right calf muscle 1"x1". Both injuries are simple in nature caused by hard and blunt substances like lathi and rod. The doctor P.W.5 has also examined, informant, Mazid Mian(P.W.4) on the same day and found five injuries:- 1. Two abrasion on left forearm dorsal surface (in middle) 1/2" x 1/2" x loss of superficial skin. 2. one bruise on back left base 4" x 1/2". 3. one scratch wound middle of the upper lip 1/6" x 1/6". 4. Two echimosis below right hypochondria 1/2" x 1/2" each. 5. pain in chest, x-ray normal. Learned counsel for the appellants has thus submitted, that from perusal of the injury report, it appears that, all the injuries found upon the injured are simple in nature, as it appears from exhibits two series. Bharat Singh (Investigating officer) has been examined as P.W.6, this witness has proved the endorsement on the fardbeyan and formal First Information Report in writing and signature of officer-in-charge Navin Sharma, which have been proved and marked as exhibits-3 and 3/1 respectively. P. W. 6 has also proved police requisitions in his handwriting and signature for medical examination of Aisa Khatoon and Nasir Mian @ Nasuruddin Mian, which have been marked as exhibits-4 and 4/1 respectively and also proved police requisitions in handwriting and signature of constable for medical examination of Nazra Khatoon and Mazid Mian, which have been proved and marked as exhibits-5 and 5/1 respectively. Learned counsel for the appellants has thus submitted, that since learned trial Court has not scrutinized the evidence properly and wrongly convicted the appellants under Sections 324/149 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code as parties are in litigating terms having land dispute and civil suit for the same is pending before learned Court below, as such, the appellants may be acquitted of the charge by extending benefit of doubt. 12. Heard, learned counsel for the State, Md. Azeemuddin, Additional Public Prosecutor. 12. Heard, learned counsel for the State, Md. Azeemuddin, Additional Public Prosecutor. Learned counsel for the State has submitted, that the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence has rightly been passed by the learned trial Court under Sections 148 and 324/149 of the Indian Penal Code, as these appellants have assaulted the informant, his mother, son and daughter-in-law by means of lathi, rod and tangi and corresponding injuries have been found by the doctor P.W.5, Naresh Prasad Sinha, who has proved the injury report, which have been marked as exhibit-2 series, the police requisition for medical treatment have been proved and marked as exhibit-4 and 5 series. Learned counsel for the State has further submitted, that Nasir Mian P.W.1, son of the informant has stated that, he was assaulted by the accused persons along with his mother, father and Nazra Khatoon causing injuries, by means of lathi, rod and tangi. Aisa Khatoon (wife of the informant) has been examined as P.W.2, she has also been assaulted along with her husband, son and Nazra Khatoon by the accused/appellants by means of lathi, rod and tangi. Tahjun Khatoon wife of Nasir Mian @ Nasruddin Mian (P.W.1) has been examined as P.W.3, she has also supported the prosecution case, who was assaulted along with her husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law by the accused/appellants causing injuries. Mazid Mian, informant of the case has been examined as P.W.4. He has proved his signature on the fardbeyan, which has been marked as exhibit-1 and has also supported the prosecution case as made out in the First Information Report. This witness has sustained five injuries on his persons, which was treated by the doctor, his wife has sustained three injuries on her person and son of the informant Nasir Mian @ Nasruddin Mian (P.W.1) has sustained bleeding injuries on his head caused by weapon of offence as contemplated under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, as such, the conviction of the appellants is well founded and is based on the material available on record. 13. Heard, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary assisted by Mr. Rohit Agrawal and learned counsel for the State, Md. 13. Heard, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary assisted by Mr. Rohit Agrawal and learned counsel for the State, Md. Azeemuddin, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and perused the records, i.e First Information Report, framing of the charge, evidence of six prosecution witnesses, five exhibits of the prosecution side and the statement of the appellants recorded under Section 313 Cr. P. C. as well impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. This Court is of the opinion that the prosecution evidence are consistent to the prosecution case. There are no vital contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses. The corresponding injuries have been found by the doctor P.W.5, who has proved the injury reports as exhibit-2 series. The investigating officer P.W.6, Bharat Singh has also found the case to be true and on that basis, police has submitted charge sheet. The defece has cross-examined all the witnesses but nothing has been elucidated to disbelieve the prosecution case. Under the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants under Sections 324/149 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code as the appellants have formed unlawful assembly, as defined under Section 141 of the Indian Penal Code and have assaulted the informant and his family members by means of lathi, rod and tangi, though the injuries are simple in nature, but the learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants under Sections 324/149 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code, in view of provisions under Section 222 Cr.P.C. as charge was framed under Section 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code. So far sentence awarded by the learned trial Court is concerned of rigorous imprisonment for two years for offence committed and punishable under Sections 324/149 of the Indian Penal Code with fine and rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence committed and punishable under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code, this Court has considered the evidence brought on record, the nature of allegation, the nature of injuries as well as the criminal antecedent of the appellants, it appears that, parties were in litigating terms with respect to land dispute and civil suit for the same was pending. The appellants have suffered rigors of trial since 2001 and as such, instead of sending them jail, it would be proper, if the sentence is modified to the period as already undergone by appellants, who have faced the rigors of the trial more than 17 years. Under the aforesaid circumstances, sentence awarded by the learned trial Court is modified to the extent of period as already undergone by the appellants. 14. In the result, the instant criminal appeal stands dismissed with modification in the sentence. 15. The appellants, who are on bail, their bail bonds are hereby cancelled. 16. Let L.C.R. along with a copy of this judgment be sent to the court concerned at once.