ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI, J.:–Vide judgment of conviction dated 16.12.2014 and order of sentence dated 20.12.2014 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Barh, Patna in Sessions Trial No.360 of 2009, appellant Kedar Prasad has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 323 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months, under Section 450 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years as well as slapped with fine appertaining to Rs.1,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo R.I. for three months, under Section 307 I.P.C. to undergo R.I. for four years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs.2,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo R.I. for six months with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently, while appellant Dilip Kumar @ Lallu has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 324 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year, under Section 379 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year, under Section 450 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs.1,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo R.I. for three months, under Section 307 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for four years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs.2,000/-, in default thereof, to undergo R.I. for six months with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently.

2. PW-1 Bandana Rani filed written report on 22.12.2006 alleging inter alia that on the same day at about 11.00 a.m. while she along with her mother Fula Devi was present inside her house, her father and brother were working in a field near about her house, her co-villager Sonu Kumar @ Dipak, son of Raman Prasad, Dilip @ Lallu Kumar, son of Kedar Prasad and Kedar Prasad, son of Bhoju Mahto made house trespass, whereupon she inquired during course thereof, Sonu and Lallu came to her, out of whom Lallu caught hold her hand and Sonu gave Chhura blow over her left wrist, left shoulder as well as over left side of face. On hue and cry raised by her, all the three escaped and during course thereof, Lallu @ Dilip snatched away golden chain appertaining to Rs.5,000/-.

3. After registration of Barh (Athmalgola) P. S. Case No.496 of 2006, investigation was taken up and after concluding the same, chargesheet was submitted facilitating the trial in a manner, the subject matter of instant appeal.

4. Defence case, as is evident from mode of cross-examination as well as statement recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. is that of complete denial. It has further been pleaded that both the parties happen to be own Pattidar having house in front of each other intervened by a lane and on account of dispute over mode of drainage of waste water, they have been falsely implicated. Two DWs have also been examined along with documentary evidence.

5. In order to substantiate its case, prosecution had examined altogether six PWs viz. PW-1 Bandana Rani, PW-2 Nutan Kumari, PW-3 Rajdeo Prasad, PW-4 Ram Chandra Prasad, PW-5 Rajesh Kumar and PW-6 Bachhu Prasad. Side by side, had also exhibited the documents viz. Exhibit-1 written report, Exhibit-1/1 signature of Ramchandra Prasad (PW-4), Exhibit-1/2 endorsement over the written report, Exhibit-2 requisition for injury report prepared by the police, Exhibit-3 injury report issued by the doctor. Side by side, defence had also examined two DWs viz. DW-1 Kapil Deo Prasad and DW-2 Naresh Prasad as well as had also exhibited two money receipts under Exhibit-A series, certified copy of order dated 28.01.1969 relating to Mutation Case No.47 of 1968-69 as Exhibit-B.

6. While assailing the judgment of conviction and sentence, it has been submitted on behalf of learned counsel for the appellants that the finding recorded by the learned lower Court is non-sustainable in the eye of law. Further elaborating his submission, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that no independent witness has been examined including the neighbours, which is apparen

Click Here to Read the rest of this document