NABIN GOGOI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.04.2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Golaghat, in Crl. Appeal No. 1/2004, dismissing the appeal prferred by the petitioners and confirming the judgment and order dated 29.11.2003 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Golaghat, in GR Case No. 1004/2002 whereby the petitioners were convicted under Section 341/323/325/34 IPC and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for fifteen days each under Section 341 IPC, simple imprisonment for a period of three months under Section 323/34 IPC and simple imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- under Section 325/34 IPC.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that an ejahar(Ext-1) was lodged by one Dinaram Gogoi on 25.2.2002 with the Officer-in-Charge of Merapani Police Station, alleging, that at about 7 P.M., on 19.10.2002, while his son Jogeswar Gogoi had gone to a shop, the petitioners, without any provocation, assaulted his son with dao/spear/dagger and seriously injured him and had also caused injuries in his left hand by assaulting him with lathi and Rs. 500/- was snatched away from him. In the said ejahar, it was also indicated that on hearing the screams of the injured, Smti Luhiti Saikia and other villagers brought the injured to his residence and thereafter, he was taken to Golaghat Civil Hospital where he was undergoing treatment. On the basis of the said ejahar, Merapani Police Station Case No. 47/2002 under Section 341/326/379/34 IPC was registered.

(3.) THE accused persons were examined under Section 313 of the CrPC, and during such examination, they had denied the circumstances appearing against them and professed their innocence. It is relevant to note that there was no evidence, whatsoever, against the third accused, namely, Sri Narayan Borah, and therefore, the learned trial court did not even feel the necessity to examine Sri Narayan Bora under Section 313 of the CrPC and accordingly, such examination was dispensed with. Predictably, Sri Narayan Bora was acquitted by the learned trial court in absence of any material against him. THE learned trial court, however, on a consideration of the materials available in the evidence on record, convicted the petitioners, as has been noted hereinabove.