Advocates:
['K PURNIMA', '', 'DARSHAN SINGH', 'MANOJ KUMAR', 'SHAILA MINZ', 'TAPAS ROY A P P']

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr. Revision No. 312 of 2005

---------

1. Hamriuddin Mian.

2. Dindar Mian.

3. Kurban Ali Mian.

4. Asriuddin Mian @ Asriuddin Ansari.

5. Basriuddin Mian @ Basiruddin Ansari.

..… Petitioners

Versus

The State of Jharkhand.

..... Opposite Party

With

Cr. Revision No. 223 of 2005

---------

Gul Muhammad

..… Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand

..... Opposite Party

With

Cr. Revision No. 311 of 2005

---------

1.Mahabar Ansari @ Mahabar Mian.

2.Karim Mian.

3.Maniruddin Mian.

..… Petitioners

Versus

The State of Jharkhand

..... Opposite Party

---------

CORAM

: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

---------

For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajeeva Sharma, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Raj Laxmi Sharma, Adv.

(in Cr. Rev. No. 312 of 2005)

Mr. A.K.Kashyap, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Adv.

(in Cr. Rev. No. 223 of 2005)

Ms. Jasvinder Majumdar, Adv.

(in Cr. Rev. No. 311 of 2005)

For the State

: Mr. Tapas Roy, APP (in both the cases)

---------

2

08/Dated: 22^nd July, 2022

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

Pursuant to the order dated 01.04.2022 notice was

issued to the petitioners in Cr. Revision No.312 of 2005, Cr.

Revision No.223 of 2005 & petitioner no.1 & 3 in Cr. Revision

No.311 of 2005. A service report has been received indicating

therein that petitioner nos. 1, 3 and 4 in Cr. Revision No.312

of 2005 have died and as per supplementary affidavit dated

10.08.2017 petitioner no.2 in Cr. Revision no. 311 of 2005

has died on 08.09.2009. The notices have been served upon

rest of the petitioners in all cases.

3.

In view of the aforesaid fact, the revision application is

dismissed as abated against petitioner nos. 1, 3 and 4 in Cr.

Revision No.312 of 2005 & Petitioner No.2 in Cr. Revision

No.311 of 2005.

4.

Since the revision applications i.e. Cr. Rev. No. 312 of

2005 and Cr. Rev. No. 223 of 2005 arise out of common

judgment passed by the appellate court and are also

interconnected with the same P.S. case, as such both are

heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

5.

Further, the issue involved in the aforesaid two revision

applications are also similar to Criminal Revision No. 311 of 2005,

and such, same is also heard along with other two cases.

Cr. Revision Nos. 312 of 2005 & 223 of 2005

6.

Both these revision applications have been preferred

3

against the judgment dated 27.01.2005 passed by learned 2^nd

Additional Sessions Judge, (F.T.C.), Jamtara, in Cr. Appeal

No. 299 of 1986/131 of 2004; whereby the judgment of

conviction and order of sentence dated 20.12.1986 passed by

Assistant Sessions Judge, Jamtara in S.C. No. 187 of 1977 as

corrected by the learned court by order dated 14.03.2005;

whereby the petitioners have been convicted for the offence

under Sections 148, 323, 324, 326 and 307 IPC has been

affirmed. The petitioner Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5 & Gul Muhammad

were sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years each under Section

307 IPC, 3 years each R.I. under section 326 IPC, petitioner

nos. 4, 5 & Gul Muhammad for 2 years each under Section

324 IPC, petitioner nos. 1, 2, 4 ,5 & Gul Muhammad for one

year R.I. each under section 148 IPC, petitioner nos. 1 and 2

for R.I. for six months each under section 323 IPC, petitioner

no.3 for 3 years under Section 307 IPC, 2 years under Section

326 IPC, 1 year under Section 324 IPC, 6 month under

Section 148 IPC and 3 months under Section 323 IPC read

with Section 109 IPC.

7.

The prosecution case in brief is that on 29.09.1976 at

about 8 p.m. all the accused persons armed with lathi, cycle

chain, Bhala, Dager and tangi assaulted Maniruddin Mian

who sustained injuries. They assaulted Maniruddin Mian in

village persol