BHISAM PRASAD BARETH Vs. DINESH MAHANT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on I.A. No. 1, application for condonation of delay in filing the instant appeal as the same has been preferred with a delay of 624 days. For the reasons assigned in the application, we are of the view that the applicant has been able to satisfactorily explain the delay in filing this appeal. Accordingly, the application is allowed and the delay is condoned.

(2.) Applicant-complainant has filed this acquittal appeal challenging the judgment of actuittal dated 18-3-2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (CG) in S.T. No. 170/2008.

(3.) Facts of the case, in brief, are that the respondent Nos. 1 to 14 have been charge-sheeted before the Court below for having committed offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 506B, 307 read with Section 149 & Section 323 read with Section 149 of the IPC. It was alleged that on 5-3-2008 in Village Rohda the accused persons have formed an unlawful assembly with an intention to commit murder of the complainant and in furtherance of their common object they assaulted the complainant with stick, club, hockey-stick etc. when he along with others had gone to the village pond to take bath. They have also assaulted the persons who tried to intervene. The trial Court after recording of evidence, found the accused persons guilty of the offence under Sections 147, 323/149, 323/149, 323/149, 323/149 of the IPC and convicted each of the accused persons vide impugned judgment under Section 147 of the IPC and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to suffer further rigorous imprisonment of two months. However, the trial Court acquitted the accused persons of the charge under Section 307/149 of the IPC. Therefore, against the impugned judgment the applicant herein had filed Criminal Revision No. 662/2010 before this Court and the same has been dismissed vide order dated 27-1-2011 as withdrawn with liberty to file an appeal in terms of proviso to Section 372 of the Cr.P.C.