SITARAM MAHATO Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application is directed against the conviction of the four Petitioners, namely, Sitaram Mahato, Fulchand Ahir, Bir Bahadur and Ramraj Ahir alias Ramdas Ahir, under Sections 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code and the sentence passed thereunder of rigorous imprisonment for three years each, the sentences to run concurrently. The Petitioners were tried before an Assistant Sessions Judge of Alipore with a jury who returned a unanimous verdict of guilty. There was an appeal before the Sessions Judge, Alipore, which was dismissed.

(2.) The prosecution case is briefly as follows: On April 6, 1954, at 2 p.m., Animesh Chandra Bhattacharjee, Inspector of Police, C.I.D., West Bengal, Alipore, received a secret information at his office at 39 Chakraberia Road, South and accordingly he took steps to intercept a supposed gang of dacoits which might be raiding a house at Palta in the course of the next evening or night. He sent a message to the Subdivisional Police Officer, Barrackpore and requested him to have a police force ready to meet him at Charnak Out-post, Barrackpore, at 7-30 p.m. that day. He then set out himself and met the police party deputed by the Subdivisional Police Officer and he also requisitioned the help of two local gentlemen, Birendra Chakravarty and Makaraddaj Misir and he loitered about in order to keep a watch on a gang of 8 or 10 suspicious persons who might be coming that way. At about 10-30 p.m. he noticed 6 or 7 persons passing along the junction of Barrackpore Station Road and Ghosepara Road and proceeding along the Ghosepara Road towards the north. Suspecting that they might be the persons about whom he had the information, he followed them. Those 6 or 7 persons entered into the Bengal Restaurant on Ghosepara Road. After they had gone inside the restaurant the Police Inspector got the staff under his control to surround the restaurant and he then entered the restaurant with some search witnesses and police officers and arrested the men who had entered the restaurant a short time before. These men tried to escape and in the course of the ensuing scuffle two of them namely, Sitaram and Bhagabati Singh, got some injuries. The Police, however, succeeded in arresting all the six of them, namely, the four Petitioners, Sitaram, Fulchand, Bir Bahadur and Ramraj, and accused Bhagabati Singh who was also convicted but who is not before us, and Ram Dulari, who was tendered pardon under Section 337 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and examined as a witness. On search of the persons of these men a small pistol, a live cartridge and some bus tickets were recovered from the person of Bhagabati Singh; one dagger, one lathi and two bus tickets were recovered from Sitaram Mahato, a bhojali with a sheath was recovered from Bir Bahadur and a dagger was recovered from Ramraj. A dagger was also recovered from Ram Dulari, who was examined subsequently as an approver. These accused persons were then taken to the Titagar Police Station, where a formal first information report was drawn up by Inspector Animesh Bhattacharjee. Investigation was done by Sub-Inspector Sachindra Nath Mukherjee, who after investigation submitted a charge-sheet against the six accused under Sections 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code. When the accused were before the court, Ram Dulari was tendered pardon under Section 337 and the remaining five accused were sent up for trial in the court of Sessions and they were all convicted under Sections 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned Sessions Judge. Bhagabati Singh was also convicted under Section 19(f) and under Section 19A, read with Section 19(f) of the Indian Arms Act by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, who tried the accused for that offence with jurors acting as assessors, and he was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 19(f) and three years under Section 19A, read with Section 19(f) of the Indian Arms Act-both the sentences to run concurrently with the sentence passed upon him under Sections 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) As stated before, the appeal was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge.