KALIPADA GHOSH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Kalipada Ghosh was employed as an Assistant Engineer in the Muzaffarpur Electricity Supply Company. One Shr K. R. Rajgopalan was at that time Resident Engineer of that Company. It so happened that the electric supply in certain areas of the town was interrupted on 9.11.1970. When a complaint was made to the Resident Engineer about the same he directed the petitioner to attend the same. The petitioner, however, replied that the break down of the electricity supply could not be restored as hs had no weather proof cable with him. On the following day i.e. 10.11.1970 at about 4.50 p.m. the Resident Engineer summoned the petitioner in his office and it, is alleged that he tried to impress upon the petitioner that he should maintain some stock of material to bs used in emergency. The Resident Engineer (P.W. 5) himself stated in his evidence that he also cautioned the petitioner with regard to the performance of his duties and responsibility. It was alleged that thereupon the petitioner assaulted the Resident Engineer while he was sitting in his office and the Resident Engineer was saved from further assault by the intervention of some office staff.

(2.) The Resident Engineer lodged information about the occurrence with the police and eventually the petitioner was put on trial for offences under sections 323 and 355 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court found him guilty under both the charges and sentenced the petitioner to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months under section 355 and one month under section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner preferred an appeal before the Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur. The learned Additional Sessions Judge who heard the appeal, maintained the conviction of the petitioner but reduced the sentence under section 355 of the Indian Penal Code to the payment of a fine of Rs. 500 and, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. No separate sentence was passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under section 323 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) It is against this conviction and sentence imposed against the petitioner that he has come up before this court. The application was admitted on the question of sentence only. But the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that conviction of the petitioner under section 355 of the Indian Penal Code was based on no evidence and therefore, this court should examine the legality of that conviction as well. I have, accordingly, allowed the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned counsel for the State to address me on this question.