Advocates:
['SWAMI NATH PRASAD RAI', 'KRISHNA SHANKAR APP', '', 'VANDANA BHARTI']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr. Rev. No. 785 of 2012

Bhim Tudu son of Ram Tudu

(Deleted & substituted vide order dated 25.06.2018)

Talamay Devi wife of Late Bhim Tudu (aged about 50 Years)

R/o Village- Gokulpur, P.O.- Sanaula, P.S.- Sanaula,

Dist.- Bhagalpur (Bihar)

…

…

Petitioner

-Versus-

The State of Jharkhand

…

… Opp. Party

---

CORAM: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

Through Video Conferencing

For the Petitioner

: Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate

For the State

: Ms. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P.

---

13/20.09.2021

1.

Heard Mr. Anurag Kashyap, the learned counsel

appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

2.

Heard Ms. Vandana Bharti, the learned A.P.P. appearing

on behalf of Opposite Party-State.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that initially,

the present criminal revision application was preferred by Bhim

Tudu, but he died on 11.01.2018 during its pendency and

thereafter, his wife namely, Talamay Devi preferred I.A. No.

4368/2018 in terms of Section 394 (Proviso) of Cr.P.C. to pursue

the case further which was allowed by this Court vide order

dated 25.06.2018 in which, it is also recorded that the original

petitioner-Bhim

Tudu

has

died

on

11.01.2018

thereby

necessitating his wife to pursue the criminal revision

application in view of the fact that the original petitioner had

lost his job on account of his conviction. Accordingly, the

original petitioner namely, Bhim Tudu has been substituted by

his wife and legal heir namely, Talamay Devi in the criminal

revision application and now, she is the petitioner in this case

before this Court.

2

4.

The present criminal revision application is directed

against the order dated 16.08.2012 passed by the learned

Principal Sessions Judge, Sahibganj in Criminal Appeal No.

04/2012 whereby and whereunder the learned appellate court

confirmed the conviction and sentence of the original petitioner

namely, Bhim Tudu under Sections 353 and 323 of the Indian

Penal Code passed by the learned trial court, although

acquitted him from the offence under Section 427 of the Indian

Penal Code and partly allowed the criminal appeal.

5.

The learned trial court, vide Judgment of conviction and

the order of sentence dated 05.01.2012 passed by the learned

Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.II, Sahibganj in Railway G.R.

Case No. 04 of 2003 / Trial No. 285 of 2011 (arising out of

Sahibganj GRPS Case No. 15/2003), had convicted the original

petitioner namely, Bhim Tudu under Sections 323, 353 and 427

of the Indian Penal Code and had sentenced him to undergo

Simple Imprisonment for one year for the offence under

Sections 353 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code each and Simple

Imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 427

of the Indian Penal Code and had directed that all the sentences

shall run concurrently.

Arguments on behalf of the petitioner

6.

The learned counsel for the petitioner, while assailing the

impugned

judgments,

submitted

that

the

independent

witnesses of the case i.e. P.Ws.- 3, 5 and 6 were declared hostile

by the prosecution and P.W.-7 and P.W.-9 are the two

investigating officers of the case. The investigation was initially

taken up by P.W.-7 and was continued by P.W.-9, who

submitted the charge-sheet. He submitted that the other

witnesses, who claimed to be the eye-witness, are the constables

who have been examined as P.Ws.- 1, 2 and 4 and they are

interested witnesses. He further submitted that A.S.I. Naresh

3

Prasad, who had recorded the fardbeyan of the informant, has

not been examined and the doctor, who had treated the

informant, has also not been examined in the case.

7.

The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted

that the informant and the original petitioner were from police

department and in fact, a sudden fight had taken place between

them and there was no intention on the