DAMODAR PRASAD MOHANTY Vs. BIRANCHI KAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order of acquittal recorded by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Cuttack, in G.R. Case No. 485 of 1991 (Trial No. 405 of 1994) as per the impugned judgment dated 21.11.1994. The informant is the petitioner, whereas accused persons are the opposite party members in this revision.

(2.) It was alleged by the informant (P.W. No. 1) in the F.I.R. (Ext. 1) that on 8.4.1991 a about 1.15 P.M. when he returned to his house from the Court, he found some bicycles were kept resting against the door of his garage. He requested the owner of the nearby hotel to ask the customers to remove the bicycles, and when there was no response, the informant started removing the bicycles and at that time two bicycles fell down. Accused Manoj Kumar Jena came and protested and also lifted the bicycles. At that time informant's neighbour accused Jagnnath Mishra and his nephew ('Bhanaja') accused Biranchi came out from the house and Jagannath asked the other two accused to assault the informant. By that time, informant's son Prem Kumar Mohanty (P.W. 3), who had arrived at the spot, raised protest to such behaviour but being instigated by Jagannath, Manoj and Biranchi dealt fist blows on the face of P.W. 3. The informant rushed to rescue of his son, but Jagannath pounced on him and dealt fist blows, as a result of which he sustained injury on his forehead and face. Thereafter the informant along with is son came and reported the matter in the Police Station and was medically examined on police requisition. That is the sum and substance of the prosecution case. It is not disputed at the bar that relating to the same incident Biranchi lodged an F.I.R. which was ultimately registered as G.R.C. No. 486 of 1991 and the petitioner and his son figured as accused in that case. Neither party has made any statement about the consequence of that case.

(3.) After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed citing four witnesses which includes P.Ws. 1 and 3, the Doctor (P.W. 2) who granted Injury Certificates (Exts. 2 and 3) and the A.S.I. of Police (P.W. 4) who investigated the case. Later on, prosecution prayed for summoning two witnesses, viz., Srikanta Prusty and Monoranjan Behera to depose as eye-witnesses and Srikanta Prusty was examined an P.W. No. 5 and the prosecution declined to examine the other witness.