Back
2018 Supreme(Jhk) 1190
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Md. Mofijuddin Mullah, son of late Abul Gani Mullah and Ors - Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 760 of 2003
Decided on : 11-09-2018
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : M/s. Ritu Kumar, Vikash Kumar Advs.
For the State : Mr. R. K. Mishra, Addl. PP
For the Informant : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Birat Kumar, Advs.
Headnote:
Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 148, 307, 34, 324 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 313 – Bail – Judgment of Conviction – Case of the prosecution as unfolded in the fardbeyan by the informant is that daughter-in-law of the informant informed him that the appellant-accused persons along with others armed with deadly weapons were abusing the daughter-in-law of the informant and were telling her to vacate her house. – At this, the informant along with his sons and other family members and relatives, who are the injured witnesses of the case, went to the place of occurrence and saw that the accused persons armed with deadly weapon were abusing and when the informant forbade them, the accused persons became agitated and assaulted the informant and others accompanying him. – There is specific allegation that the accused no. 1 assaulted the son of the informant on head with an axe on two places and severely injured him. – The appellant –accused no. 8, also assaulted the other son of the informant on his head by an axe and injured him severely. – Seeing the severe condition of these two injured sons of the informant, the doctor referred these two injured persons for better treatment. – Bhotu Sheikh assaulted the informant with an iron rod on his back and neck. – Others also assaulted the other persons accompanying the informant with rod and other weapons and injured them. – All the injured persons were treated for the injuries sustained by them. – The appellant-accused persons also looted rice, mustard and utensils etc. worth Rs. 5,000/-. – The reason for the assault was land dispute, going on between the parties. – Appeal has been preferred by the appellants being aggrieved by the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Pakur in Sessions Case whereby and whereunder, court below has held the appellants guilty for the offence punishable under Section 148 IPC and under Section 307/34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years for offence punishable under Section 148 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine of Rs. 500/- with default clause for offence punishable under Section 307/34 IPC. – Besides the appellant-accused no. 1 and appellant-accused no. 8 have been convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. – Held, There is specific evidence that appellant no. 1 assaulted PW7 on his head with an axe, accused-appellant no. 8 assaulted PW8 on his head with an axe and accused-appellant no. 2- assaulted PW5 with iron rod. – There is no specific, cogent and convincing evidence in the record regarding the involvement of rest of the accused persons in inflicting any injury to any of the injured persons. – In the absence of any cogent evidence put forth by the prosecution against rest of the accused persons except appellant nos. 1, 2 and 8, Court have no hesitation in holding that evidence in the record is insufficient to establish any of the charges, for which they faced the trial. – Accordingly, Court acquit the appellant accused nos. 4 to 7 of the charges, for which they faced the trial. – Perusal of the record reveals that the appellant –accused no. 1- Md. Mofijuddin Mullah, appellant-accused no. 2- Bhetu Sheikh @ Bhutu Sheikh and appellant-accused no. 8 are in custody and all the appellant-accused persons except appellant no. 3- against whom, the appeal has abated, are in custody. – In view of the acquittal of appellant-accused person nos. 4 to 7, they are directed to be released from the custody forthwith unless their detention is required in connection with any other case. – Appeal Allowed
I.A. No. 7173 of 2018
1. This Interlocutory Application has been filed by the appellants interalia with the prayer to recall the order dated 01.05.2018 passed in I.A. no. 9448 of 2017 in this appeal whereby, the bail granted to the appellant no. 3 was also cancelled along with other co-appellants. In this interlocutory application prayer has also been made to release the appellants except the appellant no. 3 on bail.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellant no. 3- Maniruddin Sheikh, son of Late Rustam Sheikh died on 15.11.2006 during pendency of the appeal and in support of their contention, the appellants have annexed Xerox copy of the death certificate issued by the Registrar of births and deaths of Pakur district.
3. Learned counsel appearing for informant also submits that he has knowledge that the appellant no. 3 has died.
4. Considering the fact that the appellant no. 3- Maniruddin Sheikh has died, this appeal abates in respect of the appellant no. 3- Maniruddin Sheikh.
5. Since the hearing of the appeal is being taken up today hence the prayer for bail of rest of the appellants will be considered later on in the day.
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 760 of 2003
1. Heard the parties.
2. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants being aggrieved by the Judgment of conviction dated 30.04.2003 and order of sentence dated 02.05.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Pakur in Sessions Case No. 70 of 2001/121 of 2002 whereby and whereunder, learned court below has held the appellants guilty for the offence punishable under Section 148 IPC and under Section 307/34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years for offence punishable under Section 148 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine of Rs. 500/- with default clause for offence punishable under Section 307/34 IPC. Besides the appellant-accused no. 1- Md. Mofijuddin Mullah and appellant-accused no. 8- Rakibul Sheikh have been convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years.
3. The case of the prosecution as unfolded in the fardbeyan by the informant is that on 27.02.2001 at about 8.00 A.M., the daughter-in-law of the informant informed him that the appellant-accused persons along with others armed with deadly weapons were abusing the daughter-in-law of the informant and were telling her to vacate her house. At this, the informant along with his sons and other family members and relatives, who are the injured witnesses of the case, went to the place of occurrence and saw that the accused persons armed with deadly weapon were abusing and when the informant forbade them, the accused persons became agitated and assaulted the informant and others accompanying him. There is specific allegation that the accused no. 1- Md. Mofijuddin Mullah assaulted the son of the informant namely Nilu Babu Malita on head with an axe on two places and severely injured him. The appellant –accused no. 8, Rakibul Sheikh also assaulted the other son of the informant namely Mintu Malita on his head by an axe and injured him severely. Seeing the severe condition of these two injured sons of the informant, the doctor referred these two injured persons for better treatment. Bhotu Sheikh assaulted the informant with an iron rod on his back and neck. Others also assaulted the other persons accompanying the informant with rod and other weapons and injured them. All the injured persons were treated for the injuries sustained by them. The appellant-accused persons also looted rice, mustard and utensils etc. worth Rs. 5,000/-. The reason for the assault was land dispute, going on between the parties.
4. On the basis of the fardbeyan, police registered Mahespur P.S. Case No. 8 of 2001 and took up the investigation of the case. Upon completion of the investigation, police submitted the charge-sheet. The case was committed to the Court
