EMPEROR Vs. SITALU AHIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On the night of 3 January 1932, there was a dacoity in the house of Sorabjit Pandey who lodged an information at the police station, naming Sitalu Ahir among the persons who had been identified as the dacoits. Sitalu Ahir was absconding for some time, and he was not arrested until most of the other persons accused in the dacoity had already been tried. He was placed on his trial before the Assistant Sessions Judge of Sarah assisted by a jury who by a majority of three to two returned a verdict of not guilty. The Assistant Sessions Judge has referred the case to this Court under Section 307, Criminal P.C., being of opinion that Sitalu Ahir should have been convicted. Sitalu Ahir lives in the village adjoining that in which the dacoity took place, and he has actually mortgaged some of his land to Sarju Pandey, a cousin of the complainant Sorabjit who lives in the same house with him.

(2.) Sitalu Ahir is therefore known to the people of Surabjit Pandey's village; and a certain number of witnesses of that village gave evidence that they had seen Sitalu Ahir among the dacoits. Sorabjit Pandey gives such evidence, though he does not ascribe any particular part in the dacoity to the accused Sitalu. Sarju Pandey also professes to have seen Sitalu among the dacoits, saying that he was wearing a white kurta and had a lathi in his hand, but he did not take away any of the articles stolen.

(3.) Similar evidence was given by the neighbours of Janki Pandey, Fauzdar Pandey, Siv Prasanna Pandey, Sahawan Pandey, Niranjan Ray and Moti Ahir. The chaukidar Mangal Ahir also says that he saw Sitalu Ahir among the dacoits. Sitalu Ahir absconded after the dacoity which the learned Assistant Sessions Judge pointed out to the jury; and this fact may reasonably be regarded as affording some corroboration of the evidence of his identification. In his charge to the jury the learned Assistant Sessions Judge warned them that the evidence of identification must be scrutinized with caution; but here, since it appears to be true that lights were carried by the dacoits, there would be no doubt regarding the identification if the prosecution witnesses were speaking the truth.