NIMAI BHANDARI ALIAS BARIK Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants are the two accused persons out of five who have been convicted for commission of offence under Section 395 , of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for 10 years.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on 18.4.97 at about 9.30 P.M. while P.Ws. 1 and 2 and some other passengers were travelling in the Link Express, in between Muniguda and Therubali Railway Stations, 8 of the co -passengers started looting their fellow passengers in the compartment under threat of their lives at the point of knives. The culprits looted P.W. 1 and his wife P.W. 2 who belong to Andhra Pradesh and were travelling from Bilashpur to Bobbili. So far as these two witnesses are concerned, it is alleged that the culprits took away cash and gold ornaments from them. It is also alleged by the prosecution that other fellow passengers who were in the compartment were looted of their cash and cloths. In course of commission of offence one of the culprits namely Raju Pattnaik fell down on from the running train along with the loot and sustained injuries. The remaining culprits stopped the train at a short distance before Therubali Railway Station by pulling chain and decamped with the looted properties. After Therubali Railway Station, when the train arrived at Rayagada Railway Station, P.W. 1 lodged a written report before the Officer -in -charge of Government Railway Police Station at about 11.30 P.M. and basing on the said report the case was registered and investigation was started. In course of investigation the accused Raju Pattnaik was detected lying in an injured condition on the side of the railway track in between the level crossing known as Bissam -cuttack Level Crossing and Therubali Railway Station in the morning of 19.4.1997. Some of the looted properties were also recovered from his possession which were lying near him and then he was put in the Government Hospital, Rayagada where he was treated as an indoor patient for nearly two months. In course of his treatment in the Hospital relying on his statement recorded on 25.4.97 and on basis of other informations collected the rest of the accused persons were arrested and put to trial. The learned Asst. Sessions Judge, Rayagada on consideration of the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 14 convicted the present appellants for commission of offence under Section 395 of the Penal Code and acquitted the other 3 accused persons.

(3.) THE learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State submitted that so far as the appellant No. 2 is concerned, he has been identified in the T.I, parade as well as in Court and there has also been recovery of some stolen articles and therefore, the learned Asst. Sessions Judge was justified in convicting him under Section 395 of the Penal Code. So far as the appellant No. 2 is concerned referring to the discussions made by the learned Asst. Sessions Judge, it is submitted by the learned Addl. Government Advocate that he having been identified in Court, this evidence coupled with the fact of leading to discovery of stolen articles, are enough to convict him under Section 395, IPC.