GAFFAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 374 (2) Cr. P.C. has been preferred by appellants Gaffar and Islam against the judgment and order dated 29.11.2005 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Bahraich in S.T. No. 238 of 1998, Crime No. 52/93, convicting and sentencing each of the appellant under Section 323/34 I.P.C., for a period of six months' imprisonment, under Section 324/34 IPC, for a period of one year' imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/ - each, under Section 504 I.P.C., for a period of one year imprisonment, under Section 506(2) I.P.C., for a period of one year imprisonment, under Section 426 I.P.C., for a period of one year imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/ - each and under Section 3(1)(X) S.C./S.T. Act for a period of six months imprisonment. In default of payment of fine, each of the appellant to undergo further three months imprisonment.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case is that on 31.8.1993 at about 4 p.m. appellants Gaffar and Islam tried to dismantle the constructed wall and thatch. Wife of complainant Bihari Das objected to it upon which both persons, who were armed with 'lathi', threatened her with dire consequences; the complainant ran away and his wife was assaulted by appellants Gaffar and Islam with 'lathi' and 'danda'. While running away the complainant raised alarm which attracted Ramdhani, resident of Village Kori Purwa and other villagers reached at the spot and pacified the matter. The appellants threatened the complainant and others to leave the house. It is further alleged that due to fear, the complainant could not go to lodge the F.I.R. On the next day i.e. on 1.9.1993, complainant Bihari Das lodged an F.I.R. On the basis of written report, Ext. Ka -1, chick report, Ext.Ka -5 was prepared. G.D. entries were made. Inujured Phoolmathi was sent for medical examination on 2.9.1993 and her injuries were examined at 9.25 a.m. at Primary Health Centre, Motipur. Investigating Officer prepared the site plan, Ext. Ka -3 and after completing the investigation, submitted charge sheet, Exh. Ka -4. The case was committed to the court of Sessions, charges were framed under Sections 323/34, 324/34, 504, 506(2), 426 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(X) S.C./S.T. Act. Accused -appellants denied the charges and claimed to be tried.

(3.) THE prosecution in order to prove its case examined complainant Bihari Das, P.W. -1, injured Phoomati, P.W. -2, Ram Dhani, P.W. -3, Dr. Surendra Kumar, P.W. -4, who proved, Ext. Ka -2 injury report and Surendra Nath Tripathi, P.W. -5. The statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr. P.C. Appellant Gaffar stated that prior to this occurrence, complainant had initiated criminal proceedings against him in which he was acquitted and, as such, is inimical, he lodged another case, i.e. present one against him. The accused persons further stated that they have been falsely implicated in the present case due to enmity.