STATE OF ORISSA Vs. SUNIL KUMAR THAKUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 23-12-1987 passed by the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Bhawanipatna acquitting the accused-Respondents of the offence under Section 395 I. P. C. read with Section 25(A) of the Arms Act in Sessions Case Nos. 43/7 of 1987 and 51/8 of 1987.

(2.) Bereft of all unnecessary details the case of the prosecution is that on 14-3-1987 at about 7.00 A. M. while P. W. 3, a rickshaw puller, was carrying three children including one Rajesh Jain, son of the informant to a Convent School in Bhawanipatna, on the way, the accused Respondents directed the rickshaw puller to take it near the jeep bearing No. ORS-5867. stranded nearby. When he refused to do so, accused Jaswanta and two other miscreants forcibly carried Rajesh from the rickshaw and put him in the jeep. In the meantime, accused Jaswanta Naik snatched away a gold chain weighing about one "Tola" from the neck of Rajesh. When they were forcibly carrying away Rajesh in the jeep, the public surrounded it, for which they could not succeed in their attempt. Rajesh was rescued and sent to his house in the same rickshaw. On the very date. Chandrasen Jain (P. W. 4), a Tax Practitioner at Bhawanipatna (the father of the victim), lodged a written report before P. W. 7, S. I. of Police, Town Police Station, Bhawanipatna narrating the aforesaid incident. He further stated in the F.I.R. that in the previous night i.e. 13-3-1987 accused Jaswanta Naik @ Jashu and some other persons numbering five to six came to his office and demanded Rs. 1000/- towards subscription for observing Holi. Since he refused to comply their demand, they threatened him to kidnap his son, but he did not give much importance to such threatening. On the next day morning the incident took place.

(3.) After receiving the F. I. R. P. W. 7, registered it and investigated into the case. In course of investigation he examined the witnesses, arrested accused Manoj Naik, Gouri Prasad Sahu, Pankaj Naik and Narayan Behera @ Diba, forwarded them to Court, seized the gold chain, two revolvers, some knives, live catridges and searched for the remaining accused persons namely, Jaswanta Naik @ Jashu, Sunil Kumar Thakur and Udayabhanu Patra and as they could not be traced out submitted charge sheet under Section 395 1. P. C. read with Section 25(A) of Arms Act against all the accused persons showing the non-apprehended accused persons as absconders. Subsequently, accused Sunil Kumar Thakur and Udayabhanu Patra, on being arrested were forwarded to the Court, As it appears while on bail accused Narayan Behera absconded and despite several attempts he could not be apprehended. So, his case was spilt up and accused Manoj Naik, Gouri Prasad Sahu, Pankaj Naik, Sunil Kumar Thakur and Udayabhanu Patra were committed to the Court of Session, subsequently, on being surrendered, accused Narayan Behera was committed to the Court of Session. The two cases were transferred to the Court of C. J. M.-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge and again on being withdrawn by the Sessions Judge were transferred to the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bhawanipatna. Accused Sunil Kumar Thakur, Pankaj Kumar Naik, Gouri Prasad Sahu, Udayabhanu Patra and Manoj Kumar Naik were arrayed as accused in Sessions Case No. 37/7 of 1987 and accused Narayan Behara in Sessions Case No. 51/8 of 1987. Since the two cases arose out of same occurrence and same Police Station case, both the cases were tagged together and the accused persons faced trial for the offence under Section 395 I. P. C. read with Section 25(A) of Arms Act. The plea of the accused-Respondents is complete denial of their involvement in the crime in question.