Reserved on 29.5.2026 Delivered on 18.9.2026 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2971 of 1987 Court No. - 54 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard Ms. Abida Syed, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and Sri K.K. Gupta, learned AGA for the State. 2. The accused-appellants have been convicted and sentenced vide judgment and order dated 3.11.1987 passed by Sessions Judge, Banda in Sessions Trial No. 311 of 1986, whereby the appellants were convicted under Section 323 IPC and appellants-accused are directed to be released on probation of good conduct on furnishing personal bonds and two sureties each in the sum of Rs. 500/-. 3. The appeal in respect of appellant nos. 3 (Lallu) has been abated vide order dated 6.5.2026. 4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 14.10.1984 at 5:30 A.M., Badri Prasad lodged a written F.I.R. (Ex.Ka.1) at Police Station Pailani, alleging that Krishna Kumar, Lallu, Ramesh, Suresh and Ram Bhajan, armed with lathis and farsas, attacked his son Puttan and manhandled him. When Badri Prasad intervened, the accused persons assaulted him with lathis and farsa. His daughters-in-law, namely, Smt. Bhuri and Smt. Jagrani, came to rescue him, but the accused persons also assaulted them with lathis and abused them. On the basis of the written report, the police registered the case and took up the investigation. 5. The case was registered on the same day as Case Crime No. 234 of 1984, under Sections 147, 352 and 323 IPC, at Police Station Pailani, District Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : P.K.Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.G.A. Krishna Kumar And Others .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. .....Respondent(s) Banda. After investigation, the police submitted a charge-sheet under Section 323 IPC against three accused, namely, Krishna Kumar, Lallu and Suresh, whereas the remaining accused, Ramesh and Ram Bhajan, were exonerated. 6. Charges under Sections 147, 148 and 323 IPC were framed against accused Krishna Kumar, Lallu and Suresh The other two accused, namely, Ramesh and Ram Bhajan, who had been exonerated during investigation, were summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C.During trial, the prosecution examined four witnesses, out of whom P.W.-1 Badri Prasad and P.W.-2 Jagrani were the eyewitnesses as well as injured witnesses. Both supported the prosecution case. The remaining two witnesses were formal witnesses. 7. The learned Trial Court, after examining the testimony of the prosecution witnesses, found their statements reliable to a large extent. Accordingly, the accused persons were acquitted of the charge under Section 147 IPC. Accused Ramesh and Ram Bhajan were also acquitted of the charge under Section 323 IPC. However, accused Krishna Kumar, Suresh and Lallu were held guilty under Section 323 IPC and, instead of awarding them any punishment, they were released on probation. 8. Learned Amicus Curiae submits that the learned Trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence available on record and has recorded the findings of conviction without sufficient evidence. It is further submitted that the prosecution witnesses were not wholly reliable and their testimony did not establish the charges against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. It is, therefore, contended that the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside. 9. Learned A.G.A. submits that the learned Trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence available on record and has passed the impugned judgment in accordance with law. It is further submitted that the prosecution case was duly supported by the injured eyewitnesses, the testimony of whom were found reliable by the learned Trial Court. The impugned judgment, therefore, calls for no interference. 10. I have considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A. and perused the record. 11. The prosecution witnesses, namely, P.W.-1 Badri Prasad and P.W.-2 Jagrani, were extensively cross-examined by the defence. The learned Trial Court has also scrutinised their testimony and, after careful appreciation of the evidence, acquitted the accused persons of the remaining charges, while recording their conviction only under Section 323 IPC. This itself indicates CRLA No. 2971 of 1987 2 that the evidence was examined with due care and the findings were recorded on the basis of the material available on record. 12. In cases involving an offence under Section 323 IPC, where the allegation is of simple assault, consistent testimony of the witnesses regarding the incident of assault, if found reliable, may be sufficient to sustain the conviction. In the present case, both the witnesses are injured eyewitnesses and have supported the prosecution version regarding the assault. Their testimony does not suffer from any such material infirmity which may warrant interference with the findings recorded by the learned Trial Court. 13. In view of the above, this Court finds no sufficient ground to interfere with the impugned judgment. The findings recorded by the learned Trial Court are accordingly affirmed. 14. The Trial Court's record shall be remitted back along with a copy of this judgment. 15. Compliance report be submitted to this Court at the earliest. Office is directed to keep the compliance report on record. 16. Ms. Abida Syed, learned Amicus Curiae, who has given her valuable assistance to the Court, shall be paid fees as admissible to an Amicus Curiae as per rules. September 18, 2026 Ujjawal CRLA No. 2971 of 1987 3 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- UJJAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad