BHABESH CHANDRA Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three appellants, Bhabesh Chandra Hazra, Manmatha Nath Ghosh and Jyotirmtoy Roy have been convicted by the Sessions Judge of Manbhum- Sambalpur, Purulia, under Section 120-B, Indian Penal Code, read with Secs.4(b) and 5, Explosive Substances Act, and also under Section 6 Explosive Substances Act, and have been sentenced each of them to seven years rigorous imprisonment. The three accused persons are resident at Jharia in the District of Manbhum in which the learned Judge presides. Bhabeah Chandra Hazra was the cashier of the Niluripatra Colliery and Jyotirmoy Roy was employed at the Golakdih Colliery which also is the property of the proprietor of the Niluripatra Colliery where the accused 1 had been employed.

(2.) These two, Nos. 1 and 3, came from contiguous Districts in Bengal, and as far as their work was concerned, they lived a quarter of a mile of each other at Jharia. The second appellant, Pramatha Nath Ghosh is a resident of the Bankura District in Bengal, but he carried on a coal business at Jharia about half a mile from the Niluripatra Colliery and occupied a rented house there. It has been satisfactorily shown that these three persons have for some considerable time been on very intimate terms. That is established without the slightest doubt and no serious dispute has arisen in this case on that point. Indeed, it has been argued that they have been engaged in much the same class of work and being interested in labour matters it was not unnatural that they should be on intimate terms. Jyotirmoy used to take his meals at a mess close to Hazra's quarters and sometimes he used to sleep there. Now, a group of persons, with whom they are said to have been in conspiracy, for the most part lived in Calcutta and some of them were convicted in a case which was heard in Calcutta and was called the Dynamite case.

(3.) At the house of one of them, a woman named Maya Debi, was found with a very large quantity of dynamite in addition to other property and Maya Debi and another person Dasrathi Haldar were convicted in that case and sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment. That the two groups of persons were in constant communication is made manifest by the link consisting of Dasrathi, who at times visited Jharia, where he is shown to have met and been in communication with the three appellants and of two at least of the appellants who visited Calcutta where they have been shown to have been in communication with Dasrathi and it may here be said that the defence have throughout this case offered no explanation whatever as to the nature of the communication carried on through the medium of Dasrathi.