SK SAUKAT AU Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There are as many as six appellants in this appeal which has been preferred against the judgment and order of the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur, dated 31st July, 1989. The first appellant is Sk. Saukat Ali Appellant No. 4, Sk. Mustaquin and appellant No. 6, Sk. Khalil are sons of first appellant, Saukat All. Appellant No. 5, SK. Wasir is own brother of appellant No. 1. Appellant No. 2 is SK. Alam and appellant No. 3 is Sk. Hasnain. All the appellants have been convicted under Section 326 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to five years imprisonment. Appellant Saukat Ali and Sk. Khalil have been convicted twice for the same offence i.e. Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant Sk. Mustaquin and Sk. Wasir have also been convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to two years although they have been convicted under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code. All the six appellants have been further convicted under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for one year.

(2.) The case of the prosecution was that on 10-8-1984 at 8.00 a.m., Mahfazoor Rahman Fool Babu was going to open his shop in village Balustart PS Bounsi in the district of Bhagalpur. When he reached near the house of Saukat Ali, he was stopped by all the appellants, who were standing there with garasi in their hands. Sk. Saukat Ali asked ab kahanjaoge beta bulao apne baap ko TI, and when Saukat Ali ordered that the informant be assaulted. Saukat Ali himself assaulted him firstly, with garasa on his left hand, which cut his left hand. Appellant Sk. Khalil assaulted him with garasa on his neck on the right side. Sk. Mustaquin assaulted him with garasa on his hand by which three fingers of his right hand were cut - off. Appellant Sk. Hasnain and Sk. Alam assaulted him with garasa. The motive for the assault on the complainant was that a case was pending between Sk. Azim and Sk. Saukat Ali and Saukat Ali was in the impression that the informant was the root cause of the quarrel. The informant on receiving injuries on his person fell down and raised hulla on which several persons reached there and witnessed the occurrence.

(3.) These appellants have been convicted on the testimony of the informant Md. Mahfazoor Rahman and five other witnesses corroborated the testimony of the informant.