JAMINI BARMAN Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30th January, 2016/1st February, 2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Tamluk, Purba Medinipur in Sessions Case No. 10 (August) 2007 [Sessions Trial No. 08(01) 2008] convicting the appellants for commission of offence punishable under Sections 148/304 Part-I/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for three months more for the offence punishable under Section 148 IPC and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/ each, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months more for the offence punishable under Sections 304 Part-I/149 IPC; both the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case as alleged against the appellants is to the effect that the appellants and other accused persons being armed with deadly weapons attacked Khudiram Dhara (PW1) and his brother namely, Badal Chandra Dhara (PW6) while they were cultivating the landed property of Menaka Barman (since deceased). Sushil Ch. Dhara, son of Badal and his wife namely, Radharani Dhara (PW5) were also cultivating the field. Chandan Kumar Barman and Rabindra Nath Barman @ Rabindra Nath Barman namely, appellant nos.6 & 7 respectively assaulted Sushil with a ballam. Badal was assaulted by Khokan Barman and Kanak Kanti Barman namely, appellant nos.4 & 5 respectively with shabal while Krishan Kumar Barman and Tapan Barman namely, appellant nos.2 & 3 respectively assaulted Radharani with a hasua. All the accused persons assaulted them with lathi. As a result of assault, the aforesaid persons suffered injuries. Injured persons were initially treated at Khejurberia BPHC. Therafter, Badal and Sushil were removed to Tamluk S.D. Hospital. Badal was admitted in the said hospital while Sushil was referred to Ekbalpore Nursing Home for treatment. Unfortunately, Sushil succumbed to his injuries on 2nd December, 1998 in the Nursing Home. In the meantime, FIR was lodged by Khudiram at the police station against the appellants and other accused persons. In conclusion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed and charges were framed against the appellants. In the course of trial, prosecution examined 16 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. The defence of the appellants was one of innocence and false implication. It was specifically contended that PW1 could not be a Bargadar of the land. On the other hand, one of the appellants namely, Tapan Barman (appellant no.3) had suffered injuries in the course of the incident. Defence examined two medical witnesses to prove the injuries on the appellant no.3 namely, Tapan Barman. Upon analysis of the evidence on record, the trial Judge by the impugned judgment and order dated 30th January, 2016/1st February, 2016 convicted and sentenced the appellants, as aforesaid.

(3.) Pw1, 5 & 6 are the injured witnesses in the present case.