JUDGMENT : NAVNEET KUMAR, J. 1. All the aforesaid appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.09.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Rajmahal in Sessions Case No. 34 of 2005 and Sessions Trial No. 03 of 2005 in connection with Rajmahal P.S. Case No. 170 of 2003, Sahibganj, Jharkhand, whereby and where under all the appellants have been found guilty for the offence punishable u/s. 147, 148, 337, 307/149 of IPC and 3/5 of the Explosive Substance Act read with section 149 of IPC and they were sentenced to undergo RI for six months u/s 147 of IPC, R.I. for one year u/s 148 of IPC, RI for 3 months of u/s 337 of IPC, R.I. for 5 years u/s 307/149 with a fine of Rs. 1000/- each and R.I. for 5 years u/s 3/5 of Explosive Substance Act read with section 149 of IPC with a fine of Rs. 1000/- each and in default of payment of fine the appellants were further directed to undergo S.I. for six months and all the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. It appears from the record that the some of the appellants have died during the course of pendency the appeals namely Appellant no. 1 Jamil Sheikh @ Jamil Akhtar and appellant no. 3 Matin Sheikh of Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1441 of 2006. Learned Spl. P.P. submitted the counter affidavit in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1441 of 2006 stating therein that the two appellants namely appellant no. 1-Jamil Sheikh @ Jamil Akhtar and appellant no. 3 Matin Sheikh have died and their death certificate has also been annexed with the counter affidavit by which it appears that the appellant no. 1-Jamil Sheikh @ Jamil akhtar has died on 29.04.2022 and appellant no. 3 Matin Sheikh has died on 15.05.2019. Further in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1422 of 2006 the appellant no. 1 Sultan Sheikh has died and the learned Addl. P.P. appearing in this appeal has filed counter affidavit by which it appears that the appellant no. 1 Sultan Sheikh has died on 20.01.2013. Further in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1392 of 2006 all the appellants are alive. Learned defence counsel appearing for the appellants in the aforesaid appeals have submitted that the above said appellants(Appellant no. 1 Jamil Sheikh @ Jamil Akhtar and appellant no. 3 Matin Sheikh of Cr. 1 Sultan Sheikh has died on 20.01.2013. Further in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1392 of 2006 all the appellants are alive. Learned defence counsel appearing for the appellants in the aforesaid appeals have submitted that the above said appellants(Appellant no. 1 Jamil Sheikh @ Jamil Akhtar and appellant no. 3 Matin Sheikh of Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1441 of 2006 and the appellant no. 1 Sultan Sheikh in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1422 of 2006) in above the respective appeal have died and further submitted that no close/near relative has come forward on behalf of these appellants to continue with this appeal and therefore it is urged on behalf of the appellants that let this appeal be abated with respect to the deceased appellants. Accordingly, these appeals get abated with respect to the deceased appellants and the aforesaid appeals will be heard with respect to the appellants who are alive and who are renumbered. 3. The prosecution story arose in the wake of the fardbeyan of PW-11/Salim Khan whose statement was recorded by SI, S.B. Mishra of Rajmahal Police Station on 30.11.2003 at 22 hours at Referral Hospital, Rajamahal in the District of Sahibganj. Briefly stating the allegation as set out in the said fardbeyan where on 29.11.2003 at about 4 pm the informant Salim Khan (PW-11) was going from his house to Nageshwarbag which was situated at village Koylabazar within Rajmahal district Sahibganj. When he reached Nageshwarbag the accused Nasir Ahmed, Jakir Sheikh and Hasim Sheikh asked him as to where he was going and they abused him. The informant told him not to use filthy language. Thereafter, the accused Nasir Ahmed caught hold of his neck and started pressing and said to him that he would be killed. The accused Hasim Sheikh took away Rs. 500/- from his upper pocket of his shirt. The accused Jakir Sheikh assaulted him with fists. Thereafter, the accused Nasir and Jakir asked the informant to touch their feet failing which he would be killed. The informant touched their feet then all the three accused persons forgave him. Father case of the prosecution is that the informant returned home. On 30.11.2003 at about 4.00 p.m. the informant was going to the house of Mojaul Sheikh. The three accused persons were sitting at the well. They started abusing the informant. Thereafter, the above named three accused persons started chasing the informant. Father case of the prosecution is that the informant returned home. On 30.11.2003 at about 4.00 p.m. the informant was going to the house of Mojaul Sheikh. The three accused persons were sitting at the well. They started abusing the informant. Thereafter, the above named three accused persons started chasing the informant. The informant ran towards the house of Naeem Sheikh, thereafter, the accused Nasir, Jakir and Hasim started hurling bomb. As a result, the informant sustained injury on his left leg. The witnesses Asgar Sheikh, Ramjani Sheikh and Chobi Sheikh come to save the informant then the three accused persons above named again threw bomb. Thereafter the accused 1. Abad Hussain, 2 Khursid Alam, 3. Jamil Sheikh, 4. Mukhtar Alam, 5. Asfaque Sheikh, 6. Matin Sheikh, 7. Nabir Sheikh, 8. Sultan Sehikh, 9. Motkabir Sheikh, 10 Jabrul Sheikh and 11. Edul Sheikh all reached near the house of Naeem Sheikh. Then the accused Naeem Sheikh and his wife Reena Bibi came there with two full bags of bomb and handed over the bomb to the accused persons. The accused persons threw bomb and fired pistol. As a result, the informant, Asgar Ramjani and Chobi sustained injury and got injured. The informant further learnt that the accused persons further attacked with bomb and stones at the house of Samsuddin Khan as a result of which several persons were injured. Thereafter the neighbours Ramjani Khan, Noorain Sehikh and another came there and brought the informant to Rajmahal referral hospital for treatment. The other injured persons were also brought to Rajmahal referral hospital for treatment. The motive behind the occurrence was stated to be a dispute going on between the parties in respect of general meeting in the village. Hasim Sheikh had also sustained injury due to pelting of stones. The informant further stated in the FIR that the accused persons had intended to kill him and other witnesses and the matter was reported to the police. 4. The police recorded the fardbeyan of the informant at Referral Hospital, Rajmahal on 30.11.2003 at 10.00 pm and registered an FIR u/s 147, 148, 149, 323, 337, 338, 307 of IPC, section 27 of the Arms Act and sections 3/5 Explosive Substance Act against 16 accused persons and after investigation submitted charge sheet against the present accused persons. 4. The police recorded the fardbeyan of the informant at Referral Hospital, Rajmahal on 30.11.2003 at 10.00 pm and registered an FIR u/s 147, 148, 149, 323, 337, 338, 307 of IPC, section 27 of the Arms Act and sections 3/5 Explosive Substance Act against 16 accused persons and after investigation submitted charge sheet against the present accused persons. The accused Abad Hussain, Khursid Alam, Neem Sheikh and Reena Bibi were not sent up for trial. The learned A.C.J.M. Rajmahal took cognizance of the offence accordingly and transferred the case to the Court of S.D.J.M. Rajmahal for commitment. The learned S.D.J.M., Rajmahal after complying with the provisions u/s 207 of Cr. P.C. committed the case to the court of sessions. The charges had been framed by A.D.J. - I, Rajmahal on 09.06.2005 against all 12 accused persons under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 337, 338, 307 of IPC and 27 of Arms Act and under section 3/5 of Explosive Substance Act. The defence in short was total denial of occurrence and false implication out of previous enmity and litigation. The charges were read over and explained to the accused persons in Hindi to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 5. Learned trial court after conducting the full-fledged trial passed the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence which is under challenge in this appeal. 6. Heard M/s. Gautam Kumar, Kiswanti Minj and Satya Shatakshi the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the appellants in all the appeals and Mr. Prabir Chatterjee, Spl. P.P. in (Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1441 of 2006), Mrs. Nehala Sharmim, Spl. P.P. in (Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1392 of 2006) and Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, learned Addl. P.P. in (Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1422 of 2006) appearing on behalf of the State. Arguments advanced on behalf of the appellants 7. Learned counsels appearing for the appellants submitted that the appellants do not want to argue this case on merit. Accordingly, the submission on behalf of the appellants is confined on the point of sentence only. It is submitted that all the appellants over a period of time have reached to their middle age or have become very old as the occurrence took place as far back as in the year 2003, i.e. about 20 years back. Accordingly, the submission on behalf of the appellants is confined on the point of sentence only. It is submitted that all the appellants over a period of time have reached to their middle age or have become very old as the occurrence took place as far back as in the year 2003, i.e. about 20 years back. It has been pointed that out of the 12 accused appellants Jamil Akhtar, Matin Sheikh and Sultan Sheikh have died, Mukhtar Alam is aged about 51 years old, Mutakabir Sheikh is now 41 years old, Nasir Sheikh about 51 years old, Hasim Sheikh about 56 years old, Jakir Sheikh about 66 years old, Edul Sheikh about 46 years old, Ashfaque Sheikh about 42 years old, Jabarul Shiekh about 46 years old and Nabir Sheikh about 46 years old and in this view of the matter, it is submitted on behalf of the appellants that a lenient view may be taken in awarding the sentence. Further it has also been pointed out that during the pendency of the trial a compromise has taken place between the parties and a compromise petition has also been filed which is evident from the judgment itself and it appears that due to intervention of the common friends and well-wishers and relative of both the parties the dispute was resolved between the parties and the matter was settled between the parties outside the court as it was a case and counter case between the parties and on the basis of the compromise they don’t want to pursue this case as the peace and tranquility has been restored between them. Further, it is also pointed out that all the appellants have been suffering the miseries and hardships of the criminal proceedings since last 20 years and therefore a lenient view may be taken in awarding the sentence of imprisonment for a term of the period already undergone by them and they have already remained in jail for a substantive period of time and further it is also submitted on behalf of the appellants that they are ready to pay the fine amount by way of compensation if the court awarded so. Arguments advanced on behalf of the State 8. On the other hand, the learned Addl. P.P. and Spl. Arguments advanced on behalf of the State 8. On the other hand, the learned Addl. P.P. and Spl. P.P. in the respective cases appearing on behalf of the State opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the appellants, and submitted that it is a heinous offence for which the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable u/s 147, 148, 337 and 307 read with section 149 of IPC and sections 3/5 of Explosive Substance Act read with section 149 of IPC and therefore they don’t deserve a lenient view in awarding of the sentence and further the learned Addl. P.P. and Spl. P.Ps. did not deny this fact that on basis of compromise the charges levelled against the appellants for the offence punishable under section 323 of the IPC was allowed to be compounded on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties. It has also been pointed out that when the appellants don’t want to argue this case on merit, let this appeal be dismissed and a suitable order may be passed by taking into consideration the persons who were injured in the alleged offence. Appraisals and findings 9. Having heard the parties, perused the record of these cases including the lower court record. 10. It is admitted case of the prosecution that there is a case and counter case between the parties in which, as it is evident from the judgment itself that, a compromise has taken place between both the parties and the charges u/s 323 of IPC levelled against the appellants was allowed to be compounded on the basis of the compromise arrived at between both the parties. Further it is also evident from the record that out of the 12 appellants: 1 Jamil Sheikh @ Jamil akhtar and appellant no. 3 Matin Sheikh of Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1441 of 2006, and the appellant no. 1 Sultan Sheikh in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1422 of 2006 have died and rest of the appellants are alive. Further it is also found on behalf of the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution, namely, PW-7 Firoza Bibi, PW-8 Alimuddin Khan, PW-9 Daud Khan, PW-11 Salim Khan, PW-12 Abdul Gafur and PW-13 Ramjan Khan have been declared hostile as they did not support the case of the prosecution. Further it is also found on behalf of the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution, namely, PW-7 Firoza Bibi, PW-8 Alimuddin Khan, PW-9 Daud Khan, PW-11 Salim Khan, PW-12 Abdul Gafur and PW-13 Ramjan Khan have been declared hostile as they did not support the case of the prosecution. Further it is also found that the compromise has taken place between both the parties. It also appears from the compromise petition which is available on record that during the pendency of the trial the parties have entered into compromise due to intervention of the common friends, well-wishers and the relatives. Thus it is found that peace and tranquility has prevailed between the parties and thus in the larger interest of harmonious life between the parties, the purpose of justice would be served if a lenient view is taken to maintain cordial relationship between the parties. 11. It is found that the appellants do not want to argue this case on merit and in this view of the matter the judgment of conviction passed against the appellants by the learned trial court for the offence punishable u/ss. 147, 148, 337, 307/149 of IPC, and sections 3/5 Explosive Substance Act read with section 149 of IPC is upheld and on the point of sentence, having taken into consideration, the aforesaid facts, it is found just and reasonable that the peace and tranquility which has prevailed and restored between both the parties might be disturbed if the appellants will send again in jail. 12. Further a few appellants i.e. appellant no. 1 Jamil Sheikh @ Jamil Akhtar and appellant no. 3 Matin Sheikh of Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1441 of 2006 and appellant no. 1 Sultan Sheikh in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 1422 of 2006 have died during the course of the pendency of these appeals and rest of the appellants have also reached to their middle age and therefore no useful purpose would be served by sending them again in jail and the purpose of justice would be meted out if the appellants are awarded the sentence of imprisonment for a term of the period already undergone by them and further the appellants are sentenced to pay fine to a sum of Rs. 60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand Only) collectively under all the counts in order to pay compensation to be distributed amongst the injured persons Jeenat Bibi, Afsana Bibi, Firoza Bibi, Marjina Bibi, Daud Khan, Chobi Sheikh, Abdul Gafur, Dukhan Khan, Asgar Sheikh, Alimuddin Khan, Salim Khan and Ramjani Sheikh equally to a sum of Rs. 5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) to each injured persons out of the said fine amount of Rs. 60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand) to be deposited by the appellants by way of compensation. 13. In this view of the matter, this Court awards the sentence of imprisonment to all the appellants for a term of the period of imprisonment already undergone by them and further sentenced to pay fine to a sum of Rs. 60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand Only) collectively under all the counts, in order to pay compensation to be distributed amongst the injured persons Jeenat Bibi, Afsana Bibi, Firoza Bibi, Marjina Bibi, Daud Khan, Chobi Sheikh, Abdul Gafur, Dukhan Khan, Asgar Sheikh, Alimuddin Khan, Salim Khan and Ramjani Sheikh equally to a sum of Rupees Five Thousand to each of the injured persons out of the said fine amount of Rupees Sixty Thousand to be deposited by the appellants by way of compensation. 14. Since the appellants are on bail they are given six months’ time from the date of this judgment to deposit the fine amount by way of compensation as awarded to them. 15. In case of default of payment of fine amount of Rs. 60,000/- (Rs. Sixty Thousand Only) by way compensation in order to give it to victims so awarded by this Court within the stipulated period of time, each of the appellants shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 05 year (Five year) collectively under all the counts. The learned trial court is directed to ensure that the said fine amount is deposited within the stipulated period of time and if the same is not deposited by the appellants, they will serve the sentence as awarded in case of default of payment of fine and the learned trial court by taking all necessary measures as per the provisions of law will ensure that each of the appellants serves the sentence of imprisonment in case of default of payment of fine. 16. The appellants may be allowed to deposit the said fine amount through the Nazarat of the concerned Civil Court. 16. The appellants may be allowed to deposit the said fine amount through the Nazarat of the concerned Civil Court. At the moment they deposit the fine amount, they (the appellants) shall be released forthwith on deposit of the said fine amount and they shall be discharged from the liabilities of bail bonds accordingly. The learned court below is also directed that on deposit of the said fine amount by the appellants, the notices shall be sent to the victims Jeenat Bibi, Afsana Bibi, Firoza Bibi, Marjina Bibi, Daud Khan, Chobi Sheikh, Abdul Gafur, Dukhan Khan, Asgar Sheikh, Alimuddin Khan, Salim Khan and Ramjani Sheikh, in order to disburse the fine amount in equal proportion of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) to each of the injured persons and on their appearance the said fine amount, if so deposited by the appellants, shall be disbursed to them accordingly. In case, if either of the said victims Jeenat Bibi, Afsana Bibi, Firoza Bibi, Marjina Bibi, Daud Khan, Chobi Sheikh, Abdul Gafur, Dukhan Khan, Asgar Sheikh, Alimuddin Khan, Salim Khan and Ramjani Sheikh are not traceable or not available or not found at the given address, or does not present before the Court after the notice, the same shall be disbursed either to the close or near relatives or kith and kin of the said victims, as the concerned learned trial court may deem fit and proper, and in this regard the court concerned may also involve the Para Legal Volunteer (PLV) of District Legal services Authority (DLSA), Rajmahal, Sahibganj, if required. 17. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with modification in order of sentence as above. 18. Let the copy of the judgment be sent to the learned court below along with the Lower Court Records to do needful and for its compliance in this regard in letter and spirit.