JUDGMENT : FARJAND ALI, J. 1. These two appeals arise out of the same judgment dated 04.08.1993 passed by the learend Sessions Judge, Jalore in Sessions Case No.3/1990, whereby accused Pooran Singh, Jaswant Singh, Balveer Singh, Shambhoo Singh, Mahaveer Singh and Bhanwar Singh have been acquitted from the charges under Sections 148 and 307 read with section 149 of the IPC , however, accused Mahaveer Singh, Balveer Singh and Shambhoo singh have been convicted for the offence under Section 324 of the and each of them has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- and in default of payment of fine, they would have to undergo simploe imprisonment of 15 days. 2. While Appeal No.287/1993 has been preferred by the appellants Mahaveer Singh, Shambhoo Singh and Balveer Singh being aggrieved by their conviction and sentence for the offence under Section 324 of the IPC , the State Appeal bearing No.512/1993 has been preferred against acquittal of the accused persons from the charges under Sections 148 and 307 read with section 149 of the . 3. On 17.07.2025, when the matter was listed before the court, no one appeared on behalf of the accused-appellants even in the second round and therefore, Ms. Khushi Sharma, Advocate, was appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist the court in S.B. Criminal Appeal No.287/1993. When the matter was again listed on 18.07.2025 for hearing, learned counsel Mr. P.S. Champawat appeared on behalf of the appellants. Both the counsel Ms. Khushi Sharma and Ms. P.S. Champawat were allowed to argue the appeal jointly on behalf of the accused-appellants. 4. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that on 27.03.1989, statement of injured Shiv Kumar was recorded by the police officer at Government Hespital, Jalore in which he stated that on 27.03.1989 at about 11.00 a.m. while he was going to his shap situated at Bus Stand, Jalore, Narpat the owner af the O.K. Guest House called him so he want to him and while he was talking with Narpat at the Bus stand 5-6 boys were standing and were pointing him. He told Narpat that these persens may beat him. Narpat assured that they will not beat him here and when he was returning, near Nakada Sweet Home, Mahaveer Singh, Balveer Singh and Shambhu Singh, who are appellants herein, and 3 other accused persens came there. He told Narpat that these persens may beat him. Narpat assured that they will not beat him here and when he was returning, near Nakada Sweet Home, Mahaveer Singh, Balveer Singh and Shambhu Singh, who are appellants herein, and 3 other accused persens came there. The three accused appellants were having knife in their hands and the other accused persens were empty handed. Upen seeing them, he entered the O.K. Guest House, but Balveer Singh, Mahaveer Singh and Shambhu Singh pulled him out and inflicted knife blows in his stomach. Mahaveer Singh's brother, who was having Dheti, inflicted a blow on his head and the other accused persens inflicted fist blows on his eyes. He fell down, whereafter the accused persens started beating him with fists and kicks, whereafter, he became unconscious. When he regained his consciousness, Narpat told him that on his shouting, the accused persens ran away. He had further narrated that he could identify the remaining three accused persons, if they were shown to him. It was alleged that these accused persons had inflicted injuries with an intention to kill him. Upon this statement, C.R. No.78/1989 for the offences under Sections 147 , 148, 307, 324, 323, 341 & 149 I.P.C. was registered at the Police Station Jalore. After usual investigation, the police filed a charge-sheet against thre accused persons before the concerned Magistrate, from where the case was committed to the Sessions Judge. The learned trial court framed charges agaisnt the accused persons. During the course of trial, 16 witnesses were examined and 35 documents were exhibited. The accused in their statement under Section 313 of the CrPC denied the allegations and pleaded false implication. No evidence was produced from the defence side. The learned trial court after hearing the arguments of the parties and appreciating the evidence recorded, passed the impugned judgment dated 04.08.1993, whereby accused Pooran Singh, Jaswant Singh, Balveer Singh, Shambhoo Singh, Mahaveer Singh and Bhanwar Singh have been acquitted from the charges under Sections 148 and 307 read with section 149 of the IPC , however, accused Mahaveer Singh, Balveer Singh and Shambhoo Singh have been convicted and for the offence under Section 324 of the . 5. Learned counsel for the accused-appellants submits that none of the eye-witnesses of the incident and the recovery witnesses, other than the injured witness Shiv Kumar (P.W.16) have corroborated the prosecution story. 5. Learned counsel for the accused-appellants submits that none of the eye-witnesses of the incident and the recovery witnesses, other than the injured witness Shiv Kumar (P.W.16) have corroborated the prosecution story. The prosecution story rests upon the testimony of the injured witness Shiv Kumar, but there are grave inconsistencies and contradictions in his statement and he has implicated the appellants only in order to settle his personal vengencane. Learned counsel pointed out number of other discrepanceis in the prosecution case and prayed for acquittal of the appellant. The alternative prayer of the learned counsel for the appellants is to grant benefit of Section 360 of the CrPC to the appellants for releasing them on probation. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor while arguing the appeal against acquittal of the respondents from the charges under Sections 148 and 307 read with section 149 of the IPC contended that the learned trial court has not properly appreciated the evidence available on record because the FIR as well as the statement of the injured witness makes it abundantly clear that all the accused persons, who have been named in the FIR, formed an unlawful assembly and attacked the victim with a common object to cause such bodily injuries, which may cause death. Out of the total 11 injuries caused to the victim, 8 were caused by sharp edged weapon and most of them were on vital parts. The prosecution has proved the acse against the respondents beyond a reasonable doubt. With these submissions, learned Public Prosecutor has prayed for conviction of the appellants for the offences under Sections 307 , 148 and 149 of the . 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. The case pertains to an incident of the year 1989, wherein victim Shiv Kumar was assaulted by the accused-appellants. Ample evidence is there on record to substantiate the charge under Section 324 of the IPC . The allegation that the appellants made assault over the victim Shiv Kumar and knife was stabbed into his abdomen. The statement of victim clearly establishes the culpability of the appellants for causing injuries to him. The medical evidence, particularly the statement of Dr. Anil Kumar Aggarwal (P.W.9) and the statement of the Investigating Officer, who made reocvery of knife and other material corroborating the testimony of the victim. The statement of victim clearly establishes the culpability of the appellants for causing injuries to him. The medical evidence, particularly the statement of Dr. Anil Kumar Aggarwal (P.W.9) and the statement of the Investigating Officer, who made reocvery of knife and other material corroborating the testimony of the victim. Nothing has come out from the cross- examination of these witnesses, which may negate the charges or cause any doubt over credibility of the prosecution witnesses. Hence, so far as the conviction of the accused-appellants for the offence under of the is concerned, there is no merit in their appeal. 9. So far as the sentence awarded to the appellants is concerned, there is substance in the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellants that the case is very old as it pertains to the year 1989 and a long period of almost 36 years have elapsed, during which the appellants have suffered mental agony and hardships due to pendency of criminal case; it was the first offence committed by them; they have remained behind the bars for 15 days during trial and no fruitful purpose would be served by sending them to prison at this stage. However, giving the benefit of probation to the accused after such a long period would not be appropriate. In such circumstances, this court is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be met by reducing the sentence awarded to the accused-appellants for the offence under Section 324 of the IPC to the period already undergone by them in this case. Presently, they are on bail. They need not surrender. Their bail bonds are discharged. The appeal preferred by the accused appellants, being S.B. Criminal Appeal No.287/1993, is accordingly allowed in part and while affirming the judgment of conviction, the sentence awarded to them is modified in the above terms. 10. Now coming to the appeal preferred on behalf of the State against acquittal of respondents from the charges under Section 307 , 149 and 149 of the IPC and conviction of the three respondents for the offence under Section 324 only, this court is of the view that the evidence brought on record is manifesting that there was no intent of the respondents to kill the victim, rather to cause injuries to him and the issue above has been very aptly and elabortely discussed by the learned trial court. The intention is a mental state and no physical evidence can be brought on record since it is comprehensible and inferable from the circumstances, evidence, nature of injuries, number of injuries, kind of weapon, part of body etc. From the material available on record, there seems no pre-meditation or pre-plan. No repeated injureis were caused and it was only a single blow. Allegedly there were six attackers and the victim was alone, but despite having dominion position, no efforts were made to inflict more injuries. These among the others are the circumstances showing that there was no intent to kill the victim. There is no evidence available on record to implicate the three respondents who were exonerated by the trial court. After thorough appreciation of the material available on record, this court is of the considered view that the judgment passed by the learend trial court does not suffer from any error, irreguarlity or perversity to make interference in this appeal. Hence, the appeal preferred by the State, being S.B. Criminal Appeal No.512/1993 is dismissed as being devoid of merit. 11. All pending applications are disposed of.