RAM RATAN PARAMANICK & ORS. Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals have been heard together as both stem from the judgment delivered by the learned Sessions Judge, Howrah in Sessions Trial No. 30 of April 1979 convicting and sentencing the sole appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 342 of 1979 under section 302, three of the four appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 336 of 1979 under section 324, and the other under section 323 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The prosecution ease, briefly stated, is as follows. In the morning of May 25, 1978, Kamala Kanta Paramanik @ Ashoke Paramanik (P.W. 1) along with his two relatives went to a piece of land, adjacent to their residential house in Puranipara within the Police Station of Shyarapur. There an altercation started between him and his neighbour Ram Ratan Paramanik (one of the appellants herein) over an incident of assault that took place a fortnight ago. In course of such altercation Ashoke snatched away the wooden club that Ram Ratan was carrying and hit him with it. Ram Ratan then left the place only to come back after 10 minutes with the other four appellants. They surrounded the house of Ashoke and stated petting brick bats towards it. When Ashoke and his father Narendra Nath (the deceased) came out of their house they started assaulting Narendra Nath with lathi, iron rod, brick bats etc. When Ashoke came to his rescue they also started assaulting him. However at the intervention of some neighbours the assault stopped. A local doctor was then summoned who examined Narendra Nath and advised his immediate removal to hospital. In the meantime Ashoke went to the police station and lodged an information about the incident on the basis of which a case under sections 147, 148, 447 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code was started against the five appellants. As Narendra Nath succumbed to his injuries in the hospital on June 4, 1978, the police submitted charge-sheet under section 304 of the Indian Penal Code also.

(3.) The appellants pleaded not guilty to the charges levelled against them and contended that they were falsely implicated.