SASHIBHUSAN GIRI Vs. KALAKAR MOHANTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal is directed against an order of acquittal passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Karanjia in complaint case bearing I.C.C. No. 78-86 (T.C. No. 7863/86).

(2.) The brief fact of the complainant's case is that on 27-10-1986 at about 8 a.m. the respondents came upon the land of the complainant appellant in a group and forcibly cut away and removed the unripe paddy crops worth Rs. 1600.00 which was raised by the appellant. On the allegation of commission of theft of crops, complainant case was filed against the present respondents, who are total twenty five in number, and stood trial under Section 379 read with Section 34, I.P.C. in furtherance of their common intention. By virtue of the order of this Court dated 5-11-1993, the appeal stood dismissed as against respondents 12, 13, 17 and 24.

(3.) The plea of the defence is that the accused persons cut and removed the paddy crops from the disputed land claiming that the land belongs to respondent No. 1 i.e. Kalakar Mohanta. The appellant examined three witnesses including himself to substantiate his case. The trial Court after looking into the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that there is no documentary evidence to show that the complainant appellant had been really in possession of the disputed land at the time of occurrence and had grown crops in the year in question. Against the aforesaid judgment of the trial Court, the complainant has filed this appeal on the ground that the trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence on record which unerringly points towards the guilt of the present respondents as the findings of the trial Court is that accused-respondents admittedly cut and removed the paddy crops from the disputed land. The defence having not produced any document to show that they were in possession of the land, the findings of the trial Court are perverse and does not go along with the evidence on record. In this regard, learned counsel for the appellant takes me through the evidences of the prosecution witnesses and submits that from the evidence on record, it is crystal clear that the complainant has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused-respondents have committed offence under Section 379/34, IPC.