IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

(Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction)

Criminal Revision No. 83 of 2015

Hemlal Pandit, s/o Sri Munshi Pandit, r/o village Bichchhi Pahari,

PO & PS Koderma, District Koderma

… Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand

... Opposite Party

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

For the Petitioner

: Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate

Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate

For the State

: Mr. Jitendra Pandey, APP

---------

Order No.10/Dated: 12

^th August 2022

The convict, who suffered the sentence of RI for three

months and fine of Rs. 500/- under section 279 of the Indian

Penal Code and RI for one year with fine of Rs. 500/- under

section 338 of the Indian Penal Code, with a default stipulation to

undergo SI for further one month in case the fine amount of

Rs. 1,000/- for both the offences, is the petitioner before this

Court.

2.

Koderma (Telaiya) PS Case No. 85 of 2005 was lodged

on the basis of the fardbeyan of Kishundeo Mandal recorded on

17^th February 2005. The informant alleged that Hemlal Pandit who

was driving Marshal vehicle No. JH-12A-5838 rashly and

negligently caused serious head and leg injuries to Pappu Kumar

who was leaving for school at that time. After the investigation a

charge-sheet was submitted for the offence under sections 279,

337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code and substance of accusation

was explained to the petitioner on 21^st January 2006.

3.

Six witnesses were examined by the prosecution to

prove the aforesaid charges out of whom PW3 is the informant of

this case. The other witnesses including mother of the victim boy

also claimed that they saw the incident in which Pappu Kumar @

Chhotu was grievously injured by a Marshal vehicle driven by the

petitioner.

2 Criminal Revision No. 83 of 2015

4.

Dr. Haridarshan Singh who was examined as PW6

found the following injuries on the person of Pappu Kumar:

“(I) Incised wound over left side of fore-head

(II) Swelling deformity left thigh, X-ray shows fracture left

femer.

Time of Injury: Within one hour.

Mark of identification: Black mole over right cheek.

Nature of Injury: Injury No.1 is simple caused by sharp

cutting substance.

Injury No.2, is grievous caused by hard blunt substance.”

5.

On the basis of the evidences laid by the prosecution

during the trial, the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class,

Koderma held that the charges under sections 279 and 338 of the

Indian Penal Code were proved against the accused and sentenced

him to the aforesaid terms as noticed above.

6.

The learned Judicial Magistrate has held as under:

“17. After hearing learned lawyer for defence and learned

A.P.P. and perusing the evidence available on record, first

of all I find that on the relevant date and time of the

occurrence the age of the victim, namely – Pappu Kumar @

Chhotu, s/o- Rajendra Pd. Verma, was six years as

deposed by his mother (P.W.1). Secondly, the learned

defence lawyer has not pointed out any vital contradiction

in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses so as to

disbelieve their testimony. So far as time of occurrence is

concerned, all P.Ws have deposed to the effect that the

occurrence took place in between 9.00 to 10.00 am. This

fact has also been corroborated by medical evidence that

the injured was treated on the relevant day at 11.30 hrs.

In this regard I am of view that after lapse of more than

two years, non-mentioning the exact time of occurrence by

the prosecution witnesses is not fatal for prosecution case.

Further, the statements of all P.Ws does not show that

there is any reason why they would depose falsely in

order to help the prosecution case.

I find that the evidence available on record clearly

reveal that the accused was driving the marshal jeep on a