JOGENDRA PASWAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole appellant has been convicted vide impugned judgment dtd. 6/4/1995 passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Katihar in Sessions Trial No. 7/89 for the offences punishable under Ss. 420,302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and accordingly, has been sentenced vide sentence order dtd. 12/4/1995 to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence punishable under Sec. 420 of the Indian Penal Code. No separate sentence was awarded to the appellant for the offence punishable under Sec. 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant was acquitted from the charges framed against him for the offences punishable under Ss. 120-B and 364 of the IPC. By the same impugned judgement, the co-accused, Janki Devi, was acquitted from the charges framed against her.

(2.) The appellant has challenged the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence order dtd. 6/4/1995 and 12/4/1995 respectively, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Katihar, in Sessions Trial No. 7 of 1989 by filing this appeal.

(3.) Briefly stated the prosecution case is that P.W. 2, namely, Badri Rai, gave written report to the Officer-in-Charge of Katihar Police Station on 3/5/1988 stating therein that appellant had taken Rs.8,000.00 from him on pretext to get his son namely, Kamleshari Rai, employed and when even after lapse of near about six months, his son could not get any job, his son started demanding the aforesaid amount but appellant did not return the above stated amount on this or that pretext. P.W. 2, further stated in his written report that on 15/4/1988 at about 6 P.M., his son went to the house of appellant on cycle to make demand of his money but he did not return and, thereafter, informant (P.W. 2) searched his son but could not succeed to trace him out.