IMPORTANT POINT
In absence of examination of I.O, case of prosecution becomes weak.

JUDGMENT

Navneet Kumar, J.—This appeal is preferred against the Judgment of Conviction dated 31.07.2003 and order of sentence dated 01.08.2003 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, FTC No.VI, Jmashedpur in S.T. No. 30 of 1997, arising out of Mango P.S. Case No.88 of 1996, corresponding to G.R. no.763 of 1996 whereby and wherein the accused appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 342/324/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under sections 342/34, three years under Sections 307/34 of IPC and two years rigorous imprisonment under Sections 324/34 of IPC and further directed to run all the awarded sentence concurrently.

2. The allegations against the appellant arose in the wake of the fardbeyan dated 13.4.1996 of informant Susanto Kumar Dutta who was the Manager of a Crusher Machine of Ashok Singh. He stated that on every Saturday, wages to labours were usually paid and on dated 13.04.1996 at about 3.30 pm, when the wages was paid to the labourers of the said Crusher, the accused-appellant Simol Murmu with Bhujali, Dilip Besra with Chaku (Knife) and Sushil Besra with lathi in their hands, surrounded the informant and started abusing him and Sushil Besra caught the hands of the informant from behind. The informant further stated that Dilip Besra and Simol Murmu assaulted the informant one after another by knife and bhujali by which the face and head of the informant got badly injured. Dilip Besra assaulted by knife on the eye and below the beard and Simol Murmu assaulted the informant on the temple and forehead upon which, the informant sustained injuries. It is further stated by the informant that when he tried to rescue himself from the clutches of the accused, then the bhujali of Simol Murmu fell on earth and the same was after taken by Sushil Besra who assaulted the informant on his shoulder by the said Bujali and at this time the informant tried to protect himself for which the informant got injured on his left palm of his hand.Then Munsi of the Crusher Satrughan Hansda, the driver Petho Murmu and Khalasi of the truck namely Budhram Murmu came and all of them caught him and then the accused persons fled away on Hulla and thereafter he was taken to hospital for the treatment.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid fardbeyan, FIR was lodged, the case was registered under Sections 341/342/324/326/307/34 of IPC against the accused and investigation was taken up. After investigation, the police submitted the charge-sheet in this case, on the basis of which, cognizance of the offence was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions.

4. It appears that the charges were framed against three accused persons including the appellant Simol Murmu and Dilip Besra and Sushil Besra for the offences punishable under sections 342/324/326/307 read with section 34 of the IPC on 09.04.1997 where the accused pleaded not guilty to the charges explained to them and denied the allegation levelled against them and thereafter on 31.5.1999 the two co-accused persons namely Dilip Besra and Sushil Besra pleaded guilty and both of them on the basis of being pleaded guilty were convicted for the offence punishable under section 307/34 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 3 years to each of the co-accused Dilip Besra and Sushil Besra and after trial of the accused-appellant Simol Murmu, the learned court below passed the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, which is under challenge in this appeal.

5. Heard learned defence counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

6. Assailing the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, learned defence counsel contended that the impugned Judgment and order of sentence passed by the Court below is not at all sustainable in the facts and circumstances of this case. It is further submitted that the learned cour