RAMANATH Vs. KRUSHNA CHANDRA JARIKA PARTIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision is directed against the judgment passed by learned Ad hoc Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC), Baripada in Criminal Appeal No.9/66 of 2011/2009 in confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by learned S.D.J.M., Karanjia in I.C.C. No.44/2006 (T.C. No.619/2007). As per judgment passed on 14/12/2009, the trial court had convicted six persons including the present five Revision Petitioners for the offences under Ss. 379/447/506 of I.P.C. and passed sentence against each as follows:- Petitioner No.1 (Ramanath Ho) was sentenced to undergo R.I. for three months for the offence under Sec. 379 of I.P.C., R.I. for one month for the offence under Sec. 447 of I.P.C. and R.I. for four months for the offence under Sec. 506 (1) of I.P.C. Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 namely, Aswini Ho and Ladhula Ho were sentenced to undergo R.I. each for one year for offence under Sec. 379 of I.P.C., R.I. for two months for offence under Sec. 447 of I.P.C. and R.I. for 8 months for the offence punishable under Sec. 506(1) of I.P.C. Petitioner No.4-Kuni Ho was sentenced to undergo R.I. for three months for the offence under Sec. 379 of I.P.C., R.I. for 15 days for the offence under Sec. 447 of I.P.C. and R.I. for two months for offence under Sec. 506(1) of I.P.C. Petitioner No.5-Balenga Ho was sentenced to pay fine of Rs.150.00 for the offence under Sec. 379 of I.P.C., Rs.50.00 for the offence under Sec. 447 of I.P.C. and Rs.100.00 of I.P.C. for the offence punishable under Sec. 506 of I.P.C. in default, to suffer imprisonment for six days, two days and four days respectively.

(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, is that one Krushna Ch. Jarika (Opposite Party No.1) claiming to be the owner of 7.66 acres of land having five numbers of tamarind tree on it filed a complaint case alleging that on 12/4/2006 at about 10 A.M. one Bangra Ho (since dead), Aswini Ho (Petitioner No.2) and Ladhula Ho (PedtitoinerNo.3) climbed on the said trees and were plucking tamarind fruits from the said trees. Other persons namely, Ramanath Ho (Petitioner No.1), Kuni Ho (Petitioner No.4) and Balenga Ho (Petitioner No.5) were collecting the tamarind fruits on the ground. When Krushna Ch. Jarika objected to this, all the accused persons being armed with Bala, bow and arrows etc. threatened and asked him to leave the place, failing which he would face dire consequences. They also abused him saying "SALA, MAAGHIA" etc. Some co-villagers also objected to the act of the accused persons, but they took away six quintals of tamarind fruits worth Rs.6,000.00. The matter was attempted to be resolved amicably in the village, but since such efforts failed, Krushna Ch.Jarika presented the complaint in the Court on 15/4/2006, as 13/4/2006 and 14/4/2006 were holidays for the Court.

(3.) Being aggrieved, the convict-Petitioners moved the court of Session by filing appeal, which was disposed of by learned Ad hoc Addl. Sessions Judge(FTC) Baripada. The lower appellate court held that the trial court had rightly convicted the accused persons and had also passed sentence against them appropriately and, therefore, did not deem it fit to interfere.