ALLAUDDIN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH appellant along with five accused persons was tried by lst Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga in Sessions Trial No. 33 of 1999/24 of 1990, while others were acquitted of the charges, the appellant alone suffered conviction under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of ten years.

(2.) AS the outset l wish to refer some of the salient features of the prosecution case centering round the incident in question. It was alleged that at about 7.30 p.m. on 15th May, 1989 some unidentified persons holding arms trespassed in the dwelling house of Anjum Ara (P.W. 4), forcibly secured key of the almirah from the house mistress, collected house belongings coercing house inmates, which include ornaments, cash wrist watches etc. and decamped with the booty. It was also alleged that on alarms raised by the house inmates, the neighbours and also the police came to her house, pursuant to which one of the dacoits while retreating from the place of occurrence, who is the appellant was nabbed by the police with the aid of public who also disclosed complicity of others. The criminal law was set in motion on behest of Anjum Ara (P.W. 5), pursuant to which usual investigation commenced, during which the police officer recorded statement of witnesses, visited place of occurrence and on conclusion of investigation laid chargesheet before the court. At trial that commenced against the appellant and others, the State examined altogether nine witnesses who are house inmates, neighbours and also the police officer.

(3.) THOUGH narrations made by the witnesses have been fairly spelt out in the judgment of the court below, a brief resume of their narrations shall be discussed for their proper appreciation. Though Anjum Ara P.W. 5, who was the person to have set the criminal law in motion, would reiterate her early version which she rendered before the police about commission of dacoity in her house, and also apprehension of one of the dacoits by the police before they could make retreat, gave a set back to the prosecution, as she did not identify the appellant who was very much present in the dock of the court, notwithstanding the prosecution allegation that it was the appellant who was apprehended by the police during retreat after commission of dacoity in the house of Anjum Ara. Md. Saquib Ashraf, P.W. 1, stated to have rushed to the house of his sister where dacoity was committed on information rendered by his servant namely Rahmat Ali when police came there and took Allauddin in custody from the southern part of her house. His sister told him about dacoits having removed earring, wrist watches and other house belongings. This witness would admit that his house lies at a distance of quarter mile from the house of Anjum Ara. Md. Muslim P.W. 2, an another witness, stated to have rushed to the place of occurrence on alarms, when he noticed police taking Allauddin with him. Mumtaz Ahmad Tammanna P.W. 3 stated about witnessing two persons fleeing from the side of the house of Hussain Saheb. Munna Khan P.W. 4 stated to have seen the police taking Allauddin with him. Md. Hisnain Azad, husband of Anjum Ara stated to have noticed a mob of some persons near his house, when he was informed by his wife about commission of dacoity in her house. The witness further stated about apprehension of appellant by the police. This witness did not claim to have identified any dacoits in process of their escape. Md. Ashique P.W. 7 stated to have noticed Allauddin in custody of police when he rushed to the place of occurrence. Md. Inamul Haque, P.W. 8 was a witness of formal nature and Jogendra Nath Thakur P.W. 9, a Police Officer, stated to have rushed to the place of occurrence during patrolling duty and apprehened Allauddin, the appellant, while he jumped from the roof of the house of Anjum Ara. The witness states about recording of fardbeyan of Anjum Ara, pursuant to which investigation commenced. This is all the evidence that has been adduced on behalf of the State.