JOGENDRA KUMAR DAKUA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been filed, inter alia, challenging the order dated 5- 9-1996 passed by the learned AddI. Sessions Judge, Berhampur in Cr1. Appeal No. 26 of 1995 confirming the order dated 10/8/1994 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bhanjanagar in G.R. Case No. 504 of 1981 convicting the petitioners for commission of offences under Sections 147, 148, 323, 325, 452/149 I.P.C. and sentencing each of them to undergo S.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00, in default, S.I. for one month for the offence under Section 147 I.P.C.: S.I. for one year and fine of Rs. 500.00 in default, S.I. for one month for the offence under Sections 323/149 I.P.C. S.I. for two years and fine of Rs. 500.00 in default, S.I. for month for the offence under Sections 325/149 I.P.C. and S.I. for two years and fine of Rs. 1,000.00, in default, S.I. for two months for the offence under Sections 452/149 I.P.C. with a direction that the sentences of imprisonment would run concurrently.

(2.) It was alleged that on 11. 9.1981 at about 11.30 P.M., P.W. 3 - Prasanta Kumar Mohapatra, Pramod Kumar Mohapatra (not examined) and P.W. 9 - Ramesh Kumar Mohapatra, sons of the informant - Bani Charan Mohapatra (P.W. 1) slept in the village school where one Almirah was kept being prepared by the informant. The accused persons and some others forming an unlawful assembly and being armed with various weapons came to the school and seeing the sons of the informant in a room locked the said room from outside. Finding the Almirah in the western room, they entered into the said room by breaking open the door. Sons of the informant woke up and shouted. When the informant and others rushed to the spot, the accused persons started assaulting them causing bleeding injuries. It was alleged that the accused persons took away the Almirah and the military warrant card of the son of the informant and left the place. On the basis of the F.I.R. lodged, G.R. case No. 504 of 1981 was registered.

(3.) The pleas of the defence was one of complete denial. In their state-ments recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused persons took a specific plea that due to political rivalry, the false case had been foisted.