JUDGMENT : (Ananda Sen, J.) This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 28th June, 2016 and order of sentence dated 30th June, 2016, passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Deoghar, in Sessions Trial No.297 of 2007, arising out of Mohanpur P.S. Case No.89 of 2007 (G.R. No.330 of 2007), whereby all the appellants were convicted under Sections 148, 323, 324, 341, 452, 307 & 504 of the IPC read with Section 149 of the IPC. Appellant Nos.1 and 2 have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years for the offences under Sections 307/149 IPC and fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, they are further directed to undergo S.I. for 6 months. They are further sentence to undergo R.I. for 2 years for the offence under Section 148 I.P.C., S.I. for 1 year for the offence under Section 341 I.P.C., S.I. for 3 months for the offence under Section 452 I.P.C. and R.I. for 1 year for the offence under Section 504 I.P.C. Appellant Nos.3 and 4 have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 years for the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. and fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of making payment of fine they are further directed to undergo S.I. for 6 months. They are further awarded R.I. for 2 years for the offence under Section 148 I.P.C., S.I. for 1 year for the offence under Section 341 I.P.C., S.I. for 3 months for the offence under Section 452 I.P.C. and R.I. for 1 year for the offence under Section 504 I.P.C. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the materials available on record. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that these appellants have been falsely implicated in this case. It is their case that since there was a free fight amongst the parties, the appellants could not have been convicted under Section 307 of the IPC. As per the appellants, the prosecution has failed to prove that the appellants had an intention to commit murder nor did they have any knowledge that the assault may lead to death. In absence of “knowledge” or “intention”, no conviction can be sustained under Section 307 of the IPC. As per the appellants, the prosecution has failed to prove that the appellants had an intention to commit murder nor did they have any knowledge that the assault may lead to death. In absence of “knowledge” or “intention”, no conviction can be sustained under Section 307 of the IPC. It is also the contention of the appellant that there was no mens rea in commission of the offence. In absence of a mens rea, conviction of the appellant is bad. As per the appellants, if the evidence of P.W.-1 is scrutinized properly one would understand that he is not the eye witness to the occurrence. The medical report also suggests that the injuries were of such a nature which cannot attract Section 307 of the IPC. The witnesses are highly interested witnesses and related to the informant, thus, their testimony is not believable and also there are contradictions in their statements. Further there is a reference of C.T. Scan but the prosecution withheld the report of C.T. Scan. Withholding the medical evidence was fatal for the prosecution. Learned counsel further submits that even if at all the conviction is upheld, the sentence be reduced to the period undergone since they have faced the rigours of the trial since 2007. 4. Per contra, learned A.P.P. submitted that in this case, P.W.-1 is an eye witness so is P.W.2. The P.W.-2 is the witness in whose house the appellants entered after chasing one of the injured persons i.e. Md. Ali and they assaulted him with tangi. From her evidence, nothing contrary could be extracted and she being a reliable witness, her testimony cannot be discarded. Further, it has been submitted that the Doctor’s report clearly suggests that the injuries were grievous in nature and on the vital part of the body i.e. the head. Thus, an inference has to be drawn that there was an intention to commit murder. P.W.-2 further stated that the villagers came and intervened, then only the appellants fled from the place of occurrence which clearly suggests that if the villagers would not have been there, Md. Ali and Tahir would have been murdered. There is consistent evidence of the prosecution that the assault was by tangi (axe). P.W.-2 further stated that the villagers came and intervened, then only the appellants fled from the place of occurrence which clearly suggests that if the villagers would not have been there, Md. Ali and Tahir would have been murdered. There is consistent evidence of the prosecution that the assault was by tangi (axe). So far as mens rea is concerned, it has been proved that the appellants were cutting the Palash tree of the victim, when the victim forbade them, then he was chased and assaulted. The fact that Md. Ali was chased has been proved by the testimony of the witnesses. Chasing the victim and assaulting him with tangi (axe) clearly suggests that there was an intention to commit murder, thus, Section 307 of the IPC has correctly been applied in this case. Further, it has been argued that the assault was committed by the appellants by forming an unlawful assembly and they had a common object, thus, Section 149 of the IPC is also attracted. He thus, prayed that this appeal be dismissed. 5. The brief fact of the case as delineated on the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant – Shahur Ansari S/o Md. Ali, is that on 27.03.2007 at about 03:00 P.M., when the father of the informant went to take bath behind his house at the well, five persons namely Sahabuddin Ansari, Md. Ishaque, Md. Usman @ Usman Gani @ Md. Gani @ Md. Usman Ansari, Lukman Ansari and Md. Abdeen, all residents of Police Station Ghongha, Mohanpur, Deoghar, came and started abusing his father and also ran to beat him. Having fear of being beaten, father of the informant ran to take shelter in the house of one Kalimuddin. The aforesaid person chased him to the house of Kalimuddin and started assaulting him, upon which his father started raising alarm by screaming. On hearing the scream of his father, when the brother of the informant namely Tahir ran to save his father, the accused also started beating his brother by lathi, danda and tangi (axe), because of which he got injured. Thereafter the informant with other co-villagers went to pacify the situation. 6. On hearing the scream of his father, when the brother of the informant namely Tahir ran to save his father, the accused also started beating his brother by lathi, danda and tangi (axe), because of which he got injured. Thereafter the informant with other co-villagers went to pacify the situation. 6. After filing of F.I.R., the matter came before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, who took cognizance and committed the case to the Court of Session where charges were framed under Sections 148, 323, 324, 341, 452, 307 and 504 read with Section 149 of the IPC. As the appellants claimed to be “not guilty”, they were put on trial. 7. To prove the prosecution case, altogether 08 prosecution witnesses were examined by the prosecution whose names are here under:- i. “ P.W.-1 :- Samir Ansari ii. P.W.-2 :- Basia Bibi iii. P.W.-3 :- Noushad Mian iv. P.W.-4 :- Sahoor Mian v. P.W.-5 :- Jagdish Rai vi. P.W.-6 :- Dr. Randhir Kumar vii. P.W.-7 :- Md. Ali viii. P.W.-8 :- Tahir Ansari.” 8. P.W.-1 is Samir Ansari, who in his statement has deposed that at the time of incident he was at his home. On hearing the commotion when he went near the well he saw that fighting was going on between two groups. He deposed that Sahabuddin Ansari, Md. Ishaque, Md. Usman @ Usman Gani @ Md. Gani @ Md. Usman Ansari and Abdeen, were beating father of the informant by lathi, danda and tangi (axe). Father of the informant sustained injury from that assault resulting in bleeding from his head. Thereafter they took Md Ali (father of the informant) to Sadar Hospital and from there to Ranchi for treatment. In his cross-examination he deposed that he saw father of the informant was lying in the house of Kalimuddin smeared with blood and he saw two injuries on the body of Md. Ali i.e. one on his head and another on his hand. He stated that his statement was not recorded by the police. P.W.-2 is Basia Bibi, who deposed that at the time of incident, she was at her home. She deposed that there was a Palash tree of Tahir, which Sahabuddin Ansari was cutting, for which Tahir forbade him. She further deposed that five persons namely Sahabuddin Ansari, Md. Ishaque, Md. Usman @ Usman Gani @ Md. Gani @ Md. Usman Ansari, Lukman Ansari and Md. She deposed that there was a Palash tree of Tahir, which Sahabuddin Ansari was cutting, for which Tahir forbade him. She further deposed that five persons namely Sahabuddin Ansari, Md. Ishaque, Md. Usman @ Usman Gani @ Md. Gani @ Md. Usman Ansari, Lukman Ansari and Md. Abdeen, ran to assault Tahir and his father and then they entered in her house to save their life. The aforesaid five persons also entered her house and gave a tangi blow on the head of the father of the informant. When Tahir tried to save his father, they also assaulted him and injured him. After sustaining injury, both the father and son fell down. She further deposed that Lukman again hit with a stone on Md. Ali, where the axe blow was given. Thereafter, when the villagers intervened to save them, all the aforesaid persons fled away. After the incident, the injured were taken to Deoghar hospital and thereafter to Ranchi. P.W.-3 is Noushad Mian, who deposed that on the day of occurrence he was in his house and on hearing screams, he reached at the place of occurrence and saw all the aforesaid five persons armed with weapons assaulting Md. Ali. When Tahir came to save him, he also was assaulted by tangi (axe). On sustaining injury on hand, Tahir fainted. He again received injury on the same place where tangi blow was given. In cross-examination he stated that he saw both of them fainted on the ground having injury. P.W.-4 is Sahoor Mian, who deposed that on the date of incident when Md. Ali went to take bath at the well, the above named five persons were cutting tree. When Md. Ali forbade them from cutting the tree, they started assaulting him. In order to save himself, Md. Ali ran to the courtyard of the house of Kalimuddin. He deposed that Md. Ishaque came from behind and gave a kulhari (axe) blow on the head of Md. Ali. When Tahir came to save him he also assaulted him by kulhari (axe). After sustaining injury, both of them got smeared with blood and fell down. Thereafter they were taken to Sadar Hospital and then to Ranchi for treatment. In cross examination he stated that when he reached the house of Kalimuddin, he saw injury on the head and hand of his father. After sustaining injury, both of them got smeared with blood and fell down. Thereafter they were taken to Sadar Hospital and then to Ranchi for treatment. In cross examination he stated that when he reached the house of Kalimuddin, he saw injury on the head and hand of his father. P.W.-5 Jagdish Rai, is the Investigating Officer of the case, who deposed that the occurrence has taken place on veranda of the house of Kalimuddin. He deposed that he examined both Kalimuddi and his wife and from their statements the place of occurrence was proved to be the veranda. He proved the F.I.R. which was marked as Ext.2. He also proved the fardbeyan which was marked as Ext.3. Endorsement in the F.I.R. was also proved by him which was marked as Ext.3/1. P.W.-6 is the Dr. Randhir Kumar, who deposed that he examined the (patient) father of the informant. He deposed that the patient was initially treated at Sadar Hospital, Deoghar and was referred to RIMS Ranchi for further treatment. He deposed that he has gone through the original report of C.T. scan and made following observations:- i. A large Haemorrhagic contusion in left fronto parietal lobe of head and haemorrhagic contusion in right parietal lobe. ii. Bleed along the falx iii. Fracture in the right parietal bone. He also deposed that the patient was operated for depressed fracture of right parietal bone on 07.04.2007. He opined that the injury over the head is grievous in nature. He also examined Tahir and made following observations:- i. Acute extra-dural hematoma over right tempero-parietal cerebral convexity. ii. Haemorrhagic contusion in right Tempero-parietal region iii. Fracture of right temporal bone extending to right parietal bone with pnemocephleus Nature of injury: On the basis of report of C.T. Scan of brain and skull and operation for head injury, the injury is grievous in nature. P.W.-7 is Md. Ali, who is the father of the informant, deposed that on the date of incident when he was going towards a Well, to take bath, he saw five persons namely Sahabuddin Ansari, Md. Ishaque, Md. Usman @ Usman Gani @ Md. Gani @ Md. Usman Ansari, Lukman Ansari and Md. Abdeen, cutting his tree. When he opposed the same, they started chasing him to beat him by saying that if he stops them from cutting the tree, they will cut him. Ishaque, Md. Usman @ Usman Gani @ Md. Gani @ Md. Usman Ansari, Lukman Ansari and Md. Abdeen, cutting his tree. When he opposed the same, they started chasing him to beat him by saying that if he stops them from cutting the tree, they will cut him. He deposed that in order to save himself, he ran to the house of Kalimuddin. Thereafter they also came after him and Ishaque gave a blow of kulhari on his head causing grievous head injury. When his son reached there to save him they also assaulted him. He further stated that after sustaining injury, he became unconscious. P.W.-8 is Tahir Ansari, is another injured who deposed that on the date of incident, he saw that all the five persons were assaulting his father. When he tried to save his father, they also assaulted him by tangi (axe) and thereafter he and his father became unconscious. 9. Several documentary evidences were also exhibited which are as under:- i. “Ext.-1 :- Signature on fardbeyan ii. Ext.-2 :- F.I.R. iii. Ext.-3 :- Fardbeyan iv. Ext.-3/1 :- Endorsement on fardbeyan v. Ext.4 :- Injury report of Md. Ali vi. Ext.4/1 :- Injury report of Md. Tahir.” 10. After closure of the prosecution witness, statements of the appellants were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The defence did not adduce any evidence. After hearing arguments, judgment was pronounced by Trial Court holding the appellants guilty under Sections 148, 323, 324, 341, 452, 307 and 504 read with Section 149 of the IPC. 11. From the evidence laid by the prosecution, we find that there are two injured witnesses who are P.W.-7 Md. Ali and P.W.-8 – Tahir. Further, there were other eye witnesses who are P.W.-1, P.W.-2 and P.W.-3. The eye witness P.W.-1 has stated that he had seen these appellants assaulting the father of the informant by lathi, danda and tangi (axe), as a result of which he sustained injuries. He stated that there was free fight between the parties. In his evidence, though he has stated that there was a free fight going on between the parties but on close scrutiny, we find that he stated that it is these appellants who assaulted Md. Ali and Md. Ali was trying to save himself. There is nothing in his evidence to suggest that the informant party had assaulted the accused persons. Ali and Md. Ali was trying to save himself. There is nothing in his evidence to suggest that the informant party had assaulted the accused persons. He also stated that he had seen Md. Ali lying in a pool of blood and he was taken to the hospital. He also stated that the assault was made by a tangi and Md. Ali to save himself ran and took shelter in the house of Kalimuddin. P.W.-2 is none other than the wife of Kalimuddin. She also supported the prosecution case. She stated that Md. Ali was chased by these appellants and they assaulted Md. Ali. Md. Ali in order to save himself entered in her house. She clearly stated that all the five accused persons assaulted Md. Ali with tangi (axe) and axe on the head. Tahir came to save his father but he was also assaulted. She further stated that Lukman also assaulted with the stone on the same part of the body where the assault was made with tangi (axe). She stated that when the villagers came, the accused persons fled away. Another eye witness P.W.-4 also stated that on hearing commotion he came out and saw these appellants assaulting Md. Ali. The detailed description given by him on the assault is corroborated by the testimony of the other eye witnesses i.e. P.W.-1 & 2. Thus, from the evidence of these eye witnesses, we find that all of them had stated that it was these appellants who have assaulted Md. Ali and thereafter Tahir. The injured witness i.e. P.W.-7 & 8 also stated the facts as to how they were assaulted. P.W.-7 Md. Ali stated that he was assaulted by these appellants and Ishaque gave an axe blow and injured him. He also stated that he fled to the house of Kalimuddin to save himself but all these appellants came there and assaulted him. P.W.-8, who is another injured, also stated in a similar manner. He also stated that he was injured in the assault made by the appellants upon him. Thus, from the testimony of these witnesses, it is clear that they have consistently stated that these appellants have assaulted the P.W.-7 & 8. The fact that P.W.-7 & P.W.-8 are assaulted is also substantiated by the medical evidence. The Doctor who had examined both P.W.-7 & 8, found injuries. Thus, from the testimony of these witnesses, it is clear that they have consistently stated that these appellants have assaulted the P.W.-7 & 8. The fact that P.W.-7 & P.W.-8 are assaulted is also substantiated by the medical evidence. The Doctor who had examined both P.W.-7 & 8, found injuries. The injury is fracture on the right parietal bone, so far as Md. Ali is concerned i.e. P.W.-7. So far as P.W.-8 is concerned, he found fracture on right temporal bone and P.W.-8 had to be operated for the head injury. The Doctor opined that the injuries of both were grievous in nature. Thus, by these evidence, the factum of assault upon the injured i.e. P.W.-7 & P.W.-8 has been proved. It is also proved that the injuries were grievous and on the vital part of the body i.e. on the head. From this evidence, it is also proved that the assault was by an axe and other instruments like lathi, danda and stone. 12. So far as the place of occurrence is concerned, all the eye witnesses and the injured witnesses clearly stated that Md. Ali was going to take a bath from the well when he was chased by these appellants. Md. Ali in order to save himself had to take shelter, thus ran in the house of the P.W.-2. P.W.-2 stated that Md. Ali entered her house to save himself and these appellants also chased him and entered her house assaulting him. When Tahir came to save him, he was also assaulted. Thus, the place of occurrence has also been proved by the description of the eye witnesses. The Investigating Officer also examined Kalimuddin and his wife who is P.W.-2 and she stated before him that the place of occurrence is veranda of her house. So there is no dispute about the place of occurrence in this case. 13. Now, the question is what is the motive for this assault. Though in a case which is supported by direct eye witness it is not always necessary to prove the motive, yet in this case the motive has also been proved. It has come in evidence that these appellants were cutting the Palash tree of P.W.-7, when P.W.-7 forbade them. The appellants thereafter threatened him and started assaulting him. This fact has been narrated by P.W.-7 himself and also by P.W.-2 and P.W.-4. It has come in evidence that these appellants were cutting the Palash tree of P.W.-7, when P.W.-7 forbade them. The appellants thereafter threatened him and started assaulting him. This fact has been narrated by P.W.-7 himself and also by P.W.-2 and P.W.-4. Thus, the motive is also proved. 14. Now the question is when the assault has been proved and the manner of assault has also been proved, whether these appellants can be convicted under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the IPC or not. Section 307 of the IPC reads as here under:- “307. Attempt to murder.- Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to [imprisonment for life], or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned.” 15. The basic ingredients of Section 307 of the IPC is that there should be an intention or knowledge that if the act caused death, the accused will be guilty of murder. Anyone of the component i.e. either “intention” or “knowledge” is sufficient to convict the accused. This intention and knowledge has to be gathered from the circumstances of each and every case. There cannot be any straightjacket formula. So far as the instant case is concerned, we find that the injured Md. Ali was near the well when he saw these appellants cutting his tree. He forbade them when these appellants assaulted him and to save himself, he fled. It is the consistent case of the prosecution and it has been proved by the evidence that these appellants with deadly weapon chased Md. Ali and even assaulted Md. Ali when he entered the house of P.W.-2 and had taken shelter there. This act of these appellants chasing Md. Ali and assaulting him with deadly weapon that too by an axe on his head, clearly suggests that the intention of these appellants was to commit murder. Further it has come in evidence from P.W.-2 that Lukman also assaulted with stone on the part of the body where P.W.-7 was assaulted by the others with the tangi. Ali and assaulting him with deadly weapon that too by an axe on his head, clearly suggests that the intention of these appellants was to commit murder. Further it has come in evidence from P.W.-2 that Lukman also assaulted with stone on the part of the body where P.W.-7 was assaulted by the others with the tangi. This also strengthens the impression that intention of the appellants was to commit murder. The witnesses stated that when alarm was raised and the villagers reached the place of occurrence, these appellants fled. This also suggests that if the villagers would not have come to the rescue of these injured persons, their life would have been done away with. These circumstances clearly suggest that there was an element of intention on the part of the appellants to commit murder of the injured. Be it noted that the assault was on the vital part of the body i.e. on the head. If the intention would not have been there, the appellants would not have chased Md. Ali from the Well to the house of P.W.-2 where he had taken shelter and assaulted him with axe on the vital part of body. 16. All the accused persons had formed an unlawful assembly. Though the four persons have been appellants before us but the fact which is apparent is that there was five accused and one of them died later. Section 141 of the IPC defines “Unlawful Assembly”, and from the evidence laid by the prosecution, this case falls within the ambit of the same. These five person have assaulted Md. Ali and thereafter Tahir was also assaulted. The first assault was on Md. Ali near the well and thereafter he was chased by all these five persons. When Md. Ali taken shelter in the house of P.W.-2, thereafter he was assaulted again. This suggest that there was a common object to commit the offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC. Thus, being the member of the unlawful assembly, all the five are liable to be punished with the aid of Section 149 of the IPC also. Further, the members had a common object would be evident from the fact that the accused assaulted P.W.-7 & P.W.-8 and even one of them assaulted with a stone on the same part of the body of P.W.-7 where he sustained axe injury given by other accused. 17. Further, the members had a common object would be evident from the fact that the accused assaulted P.W.-7 & P.W.-8 and even one of them assaulted with a stone on the same part of the body of P.W.-7 where he sustained axe injury given by other accused. 17. Considering what has been held above, we find that the prosecution has been able to prove the guilt of these appellants beyond all reasonable doubt. The appellants thus, have been rightly convicted under Section 307 / 149 of the IPC. So far as the sentence is concerned, the trial court has sentenced the appellant Nos.1 and 2 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and appellant Nos.3 and 4 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years. The incident occurred on June, 2016 and as per the counsel for the parties, the appellant No.1 remained in custody for a period of 11 months, appellant No.2 for 15 months, appellant No.3 for 13 months and appellant No.4 for 13 months approximately. 18. Considering the gravity of the offences, we are not inclined to reduce the sentence of the appellants for the period which they are already undergone. 19. Taking an overall view about the nature and manner in which the offence has been committed and the age of the appellants, I am of the view that the appellant No.1 should be sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and rest of the appellants for a period of three years under Section 307/149 of IPC. The fine amount which has been imposed by the trial court is not interfered with. 20. It is made clear that if the fine amount is not paid, the appellants will undergo simple imprisonment for an additional period of two months. 21. So far as offences under Sections 148, 341, 452 & 504 of all the appellants are concerned, we find no ground to differ with the findings and conclusions arrived by the learned trial court as we also find from the evidence led by the prosecution that the offences under these Sections are made out, as already discussed hereto before while dealing with the findings with regard to conviction of the appellants under other Sections of the Indian Penal Code. Thus, there needs no interference in the sentence and the fine amount imposed by the learned trial court so far as these offences are concerned. 22. Thus, there needs no interference in the sentence and the fine amount imposed by the learned trial court so far as these offences are concerned. 22. Only with the aforesaid modification in the sentence, this Criminal Appeal stands dismissed. 23. Let the copy of this judgment and the Trial Court Record be transmitted to the learned Trial Court.