JHAMAN MIAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The four appellants were placed upon their trial along with one Raghunath Prasad Yadav before the Assistant Sessions Judge of Dumka in the Santal Parganas. Raghunath Prasad Yadav has been acquitted. Appellant Nazir Mian was charged for offences under the Land Customs Act, 1924, the Sea Customs Act, 1878, and the Imports and Exports (Control) Act (XVIII of 1947). The learned Assistant Sessions Judge has held that, in view of the special procedures provided in these Acts for taking cognizance of offences under them, he had no Jurisdiction to take cognizance of those offences or to try them. He, therefore, purports to have acquitted Nazir Mian of the charges for those offences, though it seems that what he calls acquittal really amounts to discharge.

(2.) Out of the appellants, Jhaman Mian Nazir Mian and Gangadayal Sah are residents of Kotal Pokhar within Barharwa Police Station, and Ramkripal Bhagat is a resident of Barharwa. These places are under Pakur Sub-division within the Santal Parganas.

(3.) All the four appellants have been convicted under Section 147 of the Penal Code, and each of them has been sentenced under that section to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. All of them have been further convicted under Section 332 of the Penal Code, and each of them has been sentenced under that section to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. This appears to be due to a mistake because, in Para. 46 of his judgment, the learned Assistant Sessions Judge has found only Jhaman Mian and Ramkripal Bhagat guilty of the offence under this section, and has convicted them of that charge. That means that he has acquitted Gangadayal Sah and Nazir Mian of this offence. When, therefore, he has convicted and sentenced these two appellants in the final part of his order, he has obviously done so by Inadvertence. Jhaman, Ramkripal and Gangadayal have also been convicted under Section 225 of the Penal Code, and each of these three appellants has been sentenced under that section to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one and a half years. Jhaman has been further convicted under Section 333, ana has been sentenced under that section to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years. Ramkripal and Nazir Mian have been further convicted under Section 379, and each of these two appellants has been sentenced under that section to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. All these sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. There was a charge under Section 333 read with Section 149 of the Penal Code against all the four appellants; but they have been acquitted of that charge.