BRIJLAL MANDAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Each of the three appellants of this appeal was sentenced to six years' rigorous imprisonment under section 399 of the Indian Penal Code (briefly stated 'the Code'). They were further sentenced to six years' rigorous imprisonment under section 402 of the same Code. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The convictions and sentences were recorded by the First Assistant Sessions Judge, Santhal Parganas, Dumka.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on September 3, 1968 at about 9-30 p. m. at night the appellants along with certain others were found sitting in the third class waiting hall of Mirzachowki Railway Station within Sahebganj police station in the district of Santhal Parganas and they were talking among themselves in a manner which aroused suspicion in the mind of P. W. 1 Ramadhin Ram, the informant. It appears that some persons including a constable arrived there. The appellants started running away. They were, however, chased and caught. Appellant Brijlal Mandal was apprehended at the time when he was entering into an empty wagon of a goods train. The other two appellants Lakhan Choudhary and Kamdeo Choudhary were apprehended at the Mirzachawki Chauraha. All the three appellants were of the district of Monghyr. Three more persons who also tried to run away were caught. They belonged to the district of Bhagalpur. Two of them died. The third one was also convicted under sections 399 and 402 of the Code and was similarly sentenced but it is not known as to whether he has filed any appeal or not. We are, however, concerned only with the three appellants who are of Monghyr District. According to the prosecution cass a country-made gun was recovered from the possession of appellant no. 1 Brijlal Mandal, a whistle was recovered from the possession of appellant no. 2 Lakhan Chaudhary and a torch of five cells was recovered from the possession of appellant no. 3 Kamdeo Chaudhary.

(3.) The defence of appellant no. 1 Brijlal Mandal was that he was going to his relation Kedar Singh and Ujagir Singh of village Babupur. The defence of the other two appellants was that they were going to the same village to purchase Parwal creepers. According to the plea taken by the defence no boat was available to cross the river and, therefore, they had to wait in the waiting room at the railway station.