RAHIMUDDIN MAZUMDAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are hereby assailing correctness, properiety and legality of the order of conviction and sentences passed against them by the learned Session Judge, Halakandi in Sessions Case No. 59 of 1992 whereby the appellants were convicted for committing the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6(six) years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1OOO/- each, in default to suffer Rigorous imprisonment for another 6 (six) months.

(2.) The prosecution story in brief is that at about 12.30 P.M. on 5.8.1988 when R.B. Gupta, a clerk of Bandukmara Tea Estate was coming with Rs. 32000/- in a Jeep from the head office of Narsingpur Tea Estate for labour payment, some 7/8 persons barricade the garden road by putting a log and the Jeep skidded off the road and went down the drain. Thereafter dacoity was committed with dacoits snatching the money bag and leaving the place of occurrence with the booty. The persons who were in the Jeep raised alarm and as a consequence thereof, the labourers of the Garden along with Assistant Manager who were working nearby in the garden reached to the spot. The information in regard to dacoity was passed over to the owner of the garden, who in turn gave a telephonic message to the in-Charge of Lala Police Station and a G.D. entry was made to this affect. The police proceeded to the spot and a written FIR was lodged by the Assistant Manager of the Garden detailing the occurrence. However, the miscreants were chased by the labourers who caught hold of some miscreants and recovered an amount of Rs. 270000/- from a newly dugpit, an empty bag, achappal and a dagger was found in the place of oc- currence. The prosecution story further disclosed that a message was also given to Hailakandi Police Station and the police rushed to the spot since Bandukmara Tea Estate falls under the jurisdiction of Hailakandi Police Station. The record would reveal that initially charge-sheet was submitted against accused Rahimuddin Mazumdar, Nooruddin and Khaliluddin Mazumdar.

(3.) During the trial the learned Session Judge took cognizance under the provisions of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal procedure against the accused Suraj Ali and Jalaluddin and they were booked to stand trial. However, Jalaluddin was declared ab- sconder vide order dated 22.4.96 and the bailor had to pay the bail money in Misc. case No. 29/96 initiated against the bailor.