HARIA ALIAS HADIBANDHU PRUSTY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER assails his conviction made for an offence punishable under Section 395/397 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'Indian Penal Code') read with Section 395, Indian Penal Code, and under Section 25(IB) (a) Arms act, 1959 (in short, 'Arms Act') and under Section 3 of Explosive Substances Act (in short, 'Explosive Act'). He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years with a fine of Rs. 300/ -, in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for offence under Section 395, Indian Penal Code and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ - in default of further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 397 read with Section 395, Indian Penal Code, and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/ -, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months under Section 25 (IB) (a) of the Arms Act. It may be noted that he was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ - in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 3 of the Explosive Act. The sentences were directed to run concurrently by the learned C.J.M. -cum - Asst. Sessions Judge, Sundargarh, learned trial. Magistrate. The conviction and sentence were affirmed by learned Sessions Judge, Sundargarh.

(2.) ACCUSATIONS which led to the trial of the accused are essentially as follows:

(3.) IN order to substantiate its allegations, prosecution examined seventeen witnesses. As indicated above, Maniram Jindal (P.W.1) is the informant, Sobharant Jindal (P.W.2) is his wife, Swadesirani Jindal (P.W.3) is sister -in -law and Pramod Kumar Agarwal (P.WA) is the son of P.W.3 and nephew of P. Ws.1 and 2. Susil Kumar Agarwal (P.W.H) is another brother of P.WA and Mangaram Agarwal (P.W.12) is brother of P.W.1, Rabikanta Agarwal (P.W.13) is other brother of P.WA and P.W.11, and Ramesh Sahu (P.W.10) is a neighbour of P.W.1. Similarly Paikal Krushna Murty (P.W.14) and Mahadevlal Sahu (P.W.15) are neighbours. Referring to evidence of these witnesses, conviction and sentence were recorded as aforesaid. The appeal did not bring any result.