The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and lack of corroborative evidence can lead to wrongful conviction.

JUDGMENT :

By Court: Heard Mrs. J. Mazumdar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. Fahad Allam and Mrs. Shweta Singh, learned A.P.Ps. appearing for the State.

2. Above named appellants have preferred this criminal appeal challenging their conviction and sentence dated 31.07.2006 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C., 7th, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 384 of 2001,whereby and whereunder, the appellants have been held guilty for the offence under Sections 341, 332 and 353 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo S.I. for 15 days for the offence under Section 341 of the I.P.C., R.I. of six months for the offence under Section 353 of the I.P.C. and R.I. of one year for the offence under Section 332 of the I.P.C. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

FACTUAL MATRIX

3. The factual matrix giving rise to this appeal in a narrow compass is that on 24.03.2000 at about 10:30 A.M., when the informant, who is ASI of Katras Police Station along with Constable No. 1179 reached on a road in front of No. 40 Modidih Coal Dump Chjala with relation to the investigation of a case bearing Katras (Tetulmari) P.S. Case No. 56 of 2000 and was recording the statement of witness of aforesaid case, all of a sudden, the accused persons came there and wrongfully restrained the informant. The accused persons told the informant that the people of this place have filed the case against them and they will not allow the informant to record the statement of witnesses there and the accused persons also gave threatening to kill the persons, who will give statements as witness against them. Thereupon, the informant told the accused persons not to take law in their hand. The accused Shanti Devi (now she is dead and her appeal was abated vide order dated 04.08.2022) gave a stick blow on the wrist of informant resulting into injury on his wrist and blood came out from the injury. Accused Manju Devi and Punam Devi caught and pressed scrotum of informant with an intention to commit his murder. Accused Shanti Devi dishonestly took away HMT Pilot wrist watch of informant without the consent of the informant. The informant and Constable Ram Murti Choudhary made noise and on that noise many labourers of West Modidih Coal Dump came there and saved the informant.

4. On the basis of above information, FIR being Katras (Tetulmari) P.S. Case No. 101 of 2000 was registered against the accused for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 333, 307, 379, 353, 337 and 34 of the I.P.C.

5. After completion of investigation, the I.O. of the case has submitted charge sheet under Sections 341, 323, 332, 307, 379, 353, 337 and 34 of the I.P.C. against all the accused persons and accordingly, cognizance for the aforesaid offence was taken by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad. Thereafter, the case was committed to the court of Sessions. Charges have been framed for the offences under Sections 341, 332, 353, 337 and 307/34 of the I.P.C., to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

The statements of all the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. and they have denied the occurrence committed by them and told that they are innocent.

6. In order to substantiate the charges leveled against rest accused persons, altogether six witnesses were examined by the prosecution.

7. Apart from oral evidence of ocular witnesses, following documentary evidences were also adduced by the prosecution.

Exhibit-1 : Written Report for lodging FIR.

Exhibit-1/1 : Signature of Shyam Kishore Singh on the Written Report.

Exhibit-1/2 : Endorsement on registration of Written Report.

Exhibit-2 : Injury Report.

8. However, in defence, only one witness was examined on behalf of accused.

9. The learned trial court, after evaluating the evidence available on record, held the appellants guilty for the offence under Sections 341, 332 and 353 of the I.P.C. and sentenced as stated above.

10. Being aggrieved with the impugned judgment of conviction and order o