ALLARAKHA SEIKH Vs. MUSTAKIN SEIKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revisional Application has been filed against the judgment dated 27/2/1982 passed by Shri S.P. Sengupta, learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Murshidabad in Sessions Trial No.2 of January, 1982.

(2.) The accused-opposite parties are 34 in number. The prosecution case was that the deceased Salim Sk. was the head of the village guards of his village. There was theft of paddy from the fields and 4 of the guards placed under him were caught on suspicion and subsequently released. On the following day namely on 14/10/1978 at about 8 p.m. the villagers assembled near the village Mosque for a salis over the incident. The deceased Salim Sk. attended it and his parents also went with him. There the deceased was directed to produce the aforementioned 4 guards and also to give a written undertaking that there would be no further repetition of crop-theft. The deceased pleaded his inability to produce the four men and refused to give the undertaking. In writing, when he was bound up with a rope and assaulted by the present opposite parties, as a result of which he died.

(3.) Before the learned Judge the opposite parties were charged under sections 147/148/149/302 of the Penal Code. The prosecution produced no fewer than 15 witnesses before the learned Judge. On a consideration of the evidence produced before him the learned Judge convicted the opposite parties-accused Jullu Sk. under section 304 Part. II of the I.P.C. and sentenced him to 4 years R.I. and also to R.I. for 6 months under section 147 I.P.C.-both the sentences to run concurrently. The learned Judge also convicted the accused opposite parties Hasir, Mustakin, Jamal, Samed and Samser under section 147 of the Penal Code but instead of sending them to prison released them on probation of good conduct under section 360(1) Cr. P.C. These convicted opposite parties as well as other accused opposite parties were all acquitted of the charges framed against them under section 302/149 (alternatively 302/34) of the I.P.C. Hence, this Revisional Application from the side of the aggrieved father of the deceased.