Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Ori) 639

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S. Muralidhar, R.K. Pattanaik, JJ.
Amit @ Gullu @ Amitav Kumar & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
CRLA Nos. 184, 183 & 697 of 2012 and CRLA No. 619 of 2011
Decided On : 23-08-2022

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Salman Khurshid, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Avijit Pal, Ms. Lubna Naaz and Mr. Sommya Chaturvedi, Advocates (In CRLA 184 of 2012) None (In CRLA Nos.183 & 697 of 2012 and CRLA No. 619 of 2011), for the Appellant; Mr. Janmejaya Katikia, Additional Government Advocate, for the Respondent

The judgment establishes the importance of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of weapons, and the conduct of the accused in determining guilt in a dacoity case.

Headnote:
JUDGMENT - Conviction under Sections 395, 396 & 397 IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act - The judgment discusses the involvement of the accused in a dacoity and the subsequent legal proceedings. The court analyzed the evidence and found the accused guilty of the mentioned offences. The judgment also discussed the applicability of Section 302 IPC and the benefit of doubt for the accused.
Fact of the Case:

The case involved a dacoity where cash was stolen from a bank. The prosecution presented evidence of the incident, including eyewitness testimonies and the recovery of weapons. The trial court found the accused guilty of the offences.
Finding of the Court:

The court found the accused guilty based on the testimonies of eyewitnesses and the recovery of weapons. The court rejected the defense's arguments regarding the applicability of Section 302 IPC and the benefit of doubt for the accused.
Issues: The main issue was the involvement of the accused in the dacoity and the applicability of different sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the testimonies of eyewitnesses, the recovery of weapons, and the conduct of the accused to establish their guilt. The court also considered the applicability of different legal provisions based on the arguments presented by the defense.
Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed, and the trial court's judgment and sentence were upheld. The accused were ordered to surrender if on bail, failing which they would be arrested to serve their sentence.

JUDGMENT

1. These four appeals are directed against the judgment dated 20th September, 2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court-II), Bhadrak in Sessions Trial No.91/66 of 2007-09 convicting the Appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 395, 396 & 397 IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act and sentencing them as under:

I. to undergo imprisonment for life each and a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default to undergo further six months rigorous imprisonment (RI) each for the offence under Section 396 IPC;

II. to undergo RI for ten years each and fine of Rs.1000/- and in default to undergo further RI for six months each for the offence under Section 395 IPC;

III. to undergo RI for seven years each for the offence under Section 397 IPC;

IV. to undergo RI for three years each and fine of Rs.500/- and in default to undergo RI for three months each for the offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act;

V. to undergo RI for three years each and fine of Rs.500/- and in default to undergo RI for three months each for the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act; all the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. At the outset, it must be mentioned that seventeen persons were sent up for trial, of which four of them i.e. Lambu @ Chandra Mohan Jha- Accused No.1 [A1] (Appellant in CRLA No.697 of 2012); Amit @ Gullu @ Amitav Kumar [A6] (Appellant in CRLA No.184 of 2012); Chhunu @ Chunni @ Mohan Chowdhury [A7] (Appellant in CRLA No.619 of 2011) and Chandan Sharma @ Chandan Kumar Sharma [A8] (Appellant in CRLA No.183 of 2012) were found guilty of the aforementioned offences and the remaining thirteen were acquitted of all the offences.

Case of the Prosecution

3. On 23rd February 2007, Sri Maguni Charana Mahanta (PW-6), the Manager of Central Bank of India, Bhadrak Branch, Bhadrak submitted a written complaint to the Officer-In-Charge (OIC), Police Station (PS), Bhadrak stating that at about 1.25 pm on that date the cashier of the Bank, Rabindra Nath Mandal (PW-13), the Arm Guard, Dibakar Sahu (deceased), and the sub-staff-Lal Mohan Singh (deceased) collected cash from the Life Insurance Company of India (LIC) Bhadrak Branch and while coming out of the LIC building towards the gate where the hired vehicle was parked, "4 or 5 persons fired at the above employees, and snatched the gun and cash box from them." The complainant stated that there was cash to the tune of Rs.24,09,274.90, which included the cash received from both the LIC as well as the Railway counter. Immediately, the LIC staff informed the nearby outpost over phone and the injured staff were shifted to the Bhadrak Medical by PW-13.

4. In the FIR that was lodged at 3.30 pm on 23rd February 2007, in the column titled 'Accused', it was written 'unknown'. The original written report referred to above was treated as the FIR.

5. The case of the prosecution as spoken by its star witness, PW-13 i.e. the cashier of the Bank, was that he along with the two deceased went to collect cash from the Railway and the LIC in Bhadrak by hiring a private vehicle. The cash collected from both places was kept in a tin box. While emerging from the LIC office carrying the tin box towards the car, PW-13 heard a sound of firing and saw one bullet hit on the finger of Sanat Kumar Majumdar (PW-10), the driver of the car and the bullet injuries on the two deceased. He saw that six persons were fleeing away on three motorcycles by carrying a tin box. He immediately gave information to PW-6 over telephone about the occurrence.

6. The two deceased i.e. Dibakar Sahu, the Arm Guard and Lal Mohan Singh, the sub-staff were shifted to the Bhadrak Hospital and from there to the SCB Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack (SCB). While Lal Mohan Singh died on the way, Dibakar Sahu died in the hospital.

7. On 23rd February 2007, Dr. Amarendra Nayak (PW-14) of the SCB conducted the post-mortem (PM) on the dead body of Lal Mohan Singh. On dissection, he found a foreign body looking like a fired bullet. He foun