MD. ISLAM UDDIN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has put to challenge the findings of acquittal, recorded against the opposite party Nos. 2 to 6 herein, in the judgment and order, dated 17 -05 -2004, passed, in GR Case No. 752/2001, under section 147/148/447/323 IPC, by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd class, Morigaon. The prosecution's case may, in brief, be described thus: On 20 -12 -2001 at about 8 a.m., accused persons, namely, Golam Hussain, Amir Hamza, Abul Kasem, Eusuf Ali and Ashraf Ali, entered into the land of Md. Abdul Rasid and assaulted him with dao and jathi (spear) following a quarrel between him, on the one hand, and the accused -opposite party, on the other, as regards Abdul Rashid's right to plough the said land. When Abdul Rashid's son, Nizamuddin, and his wife, Hazera begum (PW3), intervened, they, too, were assaulted by the accused persons and all of them sustained injuries. By lodging an Ejahar, in writing, PW1 (Islamuddin), son of Abdul Rashid and Hazera Begam, informed the police about the occurrence. Based on the said Ejahar, and treating the same as the First Information Report (in short, 'FIR'), Mikirbheta Police Station Case No. 124/01, under Sections 147/148/ 447/325/326/427 IPC, was registered. During the course of investigation, all the said three injured were examined by PW8 (Dr. B. Nath), at Civil Hospital, Morigaon.

(2.) AS the injuries, found on Abdul Rashid (PW2), were too many, he was admitted in the hospital as an indoor patient and, after treatment, he was released on 20 -12 -2001. On completion of investigation, police submitted charge sheet, against the accused -opposite party, under Sections 147/148/447/323 IPC.

(3.) IN support of their case, prosecution examined ten witnesses including two doctors. All the accused -opposite party were, then, examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and, in their examination aforementioned, all of them denied that they had committed the offences, which were alleged to have been committed by them, the case of the defence being that of total denial. No evidence was adduced by the defence.