LAWS(ORI)-1985-1-3

GOBIND CHANDRA MAHAPATRA Vs. HARIBANDHU MAHAPATRA

Decided On January 22, 1985
GOBIND CHANDRA MAHAPATRA Appellant
V/S
HARIBANDHU MAHAPATRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balasore, reversing the order of conviction passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Balasore, and acquitting the respondents of charges under sections 147, 323 149 and 325 I.P.C. The complainants are the appellants.

(2.) The appellants and the respondents (accused) belonged to the same village and some of them are interrelated. According to the, the prosecution case, there were land disputes between the parties culminating in suits in civil courts and thus they were in inimical terms. On the date of occurrence, namely, 10-12-72 at about 5 P. M., the respondents assaulted the appellants and their other relations who came to their rescue by means of fist blows, lathis and Katari in open paddy fields, as a result of which, each of them sustained simple and grievous injures. One of the brothers of the appellants lodged the F.I.R. at the Balasore Police Station on the next day but, as the police did not take any action, the appellants after being discharged from the Balasore District Headquarters Hospital where they had been admitted as indoor patients for treatment filed the complaint petition on 6-1-1973 against the respondents.

(3.) The respondents who stood their trial for offences under sections 147, 323/149, 324/ 149 and 325/149 I.P.C. denied the charges framed against them. The learned Judicial Magistrate convicted all the respondents under sections 147 and 323/149 I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months on each count. He further convicted respondents 2, 3, 4 and 5 under section 325 I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years. The trial court directed the sentences to run concurrently. The respondents appealed before the learned Sessions Judge who found that the charges against them were not proved beyond reasonable doubt and so he set aside the orders of conviction and sentence and acquitted the respondents. This appeal is against the order of acquittal.