Advocates:
['A B MAHTO', '', 'ANOOP KR MEHTA', 'AMIT KR SINHA', 'SAUMYA PANDEY', 'A P P', '', 'AZEEMUDDIN']

1

Cr. Appeal (SJ).1355 of 2003

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.1355 of 2003

(Against the Judgment of Conviction and order of sentence dated 23.08.2003

passed by the learned 9^th Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in S.T.

No.528 of 2001, arising out of Gola P.S. Case No.16 of 2000, corresponding to

G.R. No.955 of 2000, Hazaribagh, Jharkhand)

1. Shambhoo Mahto

2. Balram Mahto

…

Appellants

Versus

The State of Jharkhand

…

Respondent

---

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

---

For the Appellants

: Mr. Anoop Kr. Mehta, Advocate

: Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate

For the State

: Mr. Azzemuddin, A.P.P.

12/22.03.2022

This appeal is preferred against the Judgment of Conviction and

order of sentence dated 23.08.2003 passed by the learned 9^th Additional

Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in S.T. No.528 of 2001, arising out of Gola

P.S. Case No.16 of 2000, corresponding to G.R. No.955 of 2000, whereby

and where under accused appellants Shambhoo Mahto and Balram

Mahto were held guilty for the offence punishable under sections 304

part II/34 of IPC, for which they were directed to undergo RI for 7

years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each and in default of payment of

fine they were further directed to undergo RI for two months.

2.

The prosecution case arose in the wake of fardbayan of one

Makhan Thakur recorded on 19.05.2000 at 15.15 pm at Gola Hospital,

Gola. It has been alleged therein that the informant on Friday dated

19.05.2000 at 12.30 pm was getting his house repaired with the help of

labourers, meanwhile Chatru Mahto, Balram Mahto and Shambhoo

Mahto came up there with lathi, danda and began to scold him and

stopped him from doing repairing work saying that the land was

belonging to them, but when the informant said that it was his land,

the aforesaid three accused persons began to assault him by lathi and as

a consequence he sustained injury on his head and when his son

Pancham Kumar Thakur, wife Panchami Devi, daughters Jyanti Devi

and Sarswati Devi came to rescue, the accused persons injured them

also. Meanwhile Dewanand Mahto and Pramod Mahto also arrived

there with lathi in their hands and entered into the house and on being

2

Cr. Appeal (SJ).1355 of 2003

protested they also assaulted the informant and his family members

and then several people from the village gathered there and rescued

him being assaulted more. The reason assigned by the informant for

the quarrel was landed property dispute.

3.

On the basis of fardbayan lodged by the informant, Gola P.S. case

No. 16/2000 was registered under Sections 323, 448, 341/34 of IPC and

later on added section 304 of the IPC against the accused and

investigation was taken up. After investigation, the police submitted

the charge-sheet in this case, on the basis of which, cognizance was

taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions 9^th

Additional District & Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh, framed charge on

31.05.2002 under Sections 426, 337, 304 of IPC and after trial, the

learned court below passed the impugned judgment of conviction and

order of sentence, which is under challenge in this appeal.

4.

Heard Anoop Kumar Mehta learned defence counsel appearing

on behalf of the appellants and learned APP Mr. Azeemuddin

appearing on behalf of the State.

5.

Assailing the impugned judgment of conviction and order of

sentence, learned defence counsel contended that the conviction and

sentence passed by the learned trial court is contrary to the fact and

circumstance of the case and contrary to the settled principles of law

and learned court below failed to appreciate the vital omission and

commissions in the depositions of PWs. It has been submitted by the

learned defence counsel that the learned court below erroneously and

illegally treated the fardbeyan of the informant as d