SANJAY RAKSHIT Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT :- Both appellants have been convicted under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years each.

(2.) The prosecution case in brief is that on 28-5-1992 at 8.15 P.M. when the informant, Sudipta Roy, P.W. 2 was returning by his Maruti Car bearing number BR 01-0775C of white colour from his clinic to his residence and turned his aforesaid car towards cemetery road, a boy aged about 22 years stopped his car by signalling his hand and asked him whether he was Dr. Mitra from whom he wanted to get his mother examined. It has been alleged that informant replied that he is not Doctor Mittra and he resides at some distance from there. Thereafter, the said boy asked him (informant) to give the telephone number of Doctor Mittraa. The informant gave telephone number of Doctor Mittra to that boy and he noted the name on his palm. Thereafter, the informant went to his house. It is further alleged that when he reached his house, the same boy at about 9 P.M. came at his residence and asked about Doctor Mittra and he replied that Doctor Mittra has not returned as yet and the boy returned back. But again at 9.30 P.M. he came at the residence of the informant and in weeping voice requested the informant to see his ill mother who was lying unconscious at Suresh Colony. On the request made by the boy, the informant along with him on his car proceeded for examining his mother. When the informant reached at distance of about 200 yards, an other boy stopped his car and asked the reason of such delay and requested the informant to proceed quickly. He also set inside the vehicle. When they reached near 51/2. Columba's college, after some while, one of the boys took out country made revolver from his own possession and got the car stopped at the point of revolver aiming on the head of the informant. There were two boys standing there from before got inside the car and thereafter one of the four boys sat near the steering of the car but the other boys sat in front side and got the informant seated in the back seat of the car. They asked the informant at the point of revolver to keep quiet otherwise they will do away with the life of the informant and thereafter all the said boys proceeded with the car on the road leading to Chanha Church turning from main road and began to assault the informant. It has been alleged that one boy made effort to press the neck of the informant by the chain of cycle and snatched his purse containing a sum of Rs. 350/-, one ring with diamond and gold worth about Rs. 3000/-, one HMT watch was worth Rupees 1000/-. The further case of the prosecution is that the said boys stopped the car after about 20-25 minutes on the said road at some place and opened the gate of the car and began to assault the informant by pressing his neck with the chain but the informant escaped from there and fell down in a mud-ditch and hid himself. It is further alleged that they considered the informant to be unconscious and fled away from there. It is alleged that the informant was lying there for a period of ten minutes and thereafter the informant began to return on fort to Hazaribagh, but in the way Ram Sewak Singh P.W. 5 well acquainted with the informant, reached on the road in Chanha Village. The informant narrated the incident to him and his son. They brought the informant to Hazaribagh. It has been further alleged that the miscreants were aged about 22 years and were of height group of 5 ft. 7 inches of fair complexion having beard grown up to a little extent. It has been stated that he narrated about the description of the miscreants in details. On the basis of the fardbeyan, F.I.R. was lodged and registered under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code against the unknown persons. After completion of the investigation charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons. Accordingly cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Session where the trial concluded with the result as stated above.

(3.) In order to prove its case the prosecution witnesses had examined altogether nine witnesses including the informant, P.W. 2. P.W. 1 Parth Mehta had proved Fardbeyan of the informant which has been marked Ext. 1, P.W. 2 Dr. Sudipta Roy is informant himself P.W. 3 Anil Kumar Jaiswal has proved his signature on his statement given before the Magistrate concerned under Section 164, Cr. P.C. which are Exts. 2 and 3 respectively. P.W. 4 Bijay Kumar has proved his statement recorded before the Magistrate concerned which was marked Ext. 4 P.W. 5 is Ram Sewak Singh. P.W. 6 is Parshuram who has proved his injury report which is marked as Exts. 5. P.W. 8 Chandrika Ram who was judicial Magistrate, Proved T.I. chart which was marked Ext. 6. Moti Ram P.W. 8 and Tribani Kumar Roy P.W. 9 who are formal witnesses, have proved formal F.I.R. and fardbeyan which were marked Exts. 7 and 8 respectively.