ABDUS SUBHAN Vs. JAHERUL HOQUE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 04.06.2013 of the learned Sessions Judge, Karimganj in Sessions case No. 46/2009. By the said judgment, the accused/respondents numbering 04 (four) have been acquitted of the charges framed against them u/s. 323/436 IPC. I have heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel led by Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and have also heard Mr. N. Dhar, learned counsel representing the accused/respondents. I have also gone through the entire materials on record.

(2.) The FIR that was lodged on 20.06.2007, named the accused persons with the allegations of forming an unlawful assembly, criminal trespass into the homestead of the complainant and cutting the trees and plants planted by the complainant The mother of the complainant namely, Sundari Bibi, aged about 80 years when raised protest against the same, the accused/respondents allegedly assaulted her with Dao and also with fist and blows. The FIR also alleged that the accused persons snatched away a golden necklace from the daughter of the complainant. Further allegation made in the FIR was that they also set fire in one of the houses of the complainant and also restrained the complainant for about one hour at the place of occurrence. As alleged in the FIR, the house was completely gutted by fire causing loss of valuable articles.

(3.) On receipt of the FIR, Patharkandi Police Station case No. 87/2007 was registered u/s. 143/447/325/435/379 IPC. The Investigating Officer entrusted with the case, conducted the investigation and on conclusion of the same, submitted Final Report. Being dissatisfied, the complainant filed Naraji Case and the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karimganj, after examination of the complainant and nine other witnesses, took cognizance of offence against the accused persons u/s. 323/436 IPC. Charges having been framed u/s. 323/436/34 IPC against all the accused persons and they having pleaded not guilty of the same, trial started, during which the prosecution examined five witnesses. Defence case was of complete denial and the accused persons in their statements recorded u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. pleaded not guilty. They also examined 02 (two) DWs.