YUDHISTHIR RAJWAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 08.05.2003 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 4, Bokaro in S.T. No. 103 of 1998 whereby the appellants were convicted for the offence under section 148, 427, 436, 149 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year under section 148 IPC, R.I. for one Year under section 427 of the IPC and R.I. for seven years under section 436/149 of the IPC.

(2.) The case of prosecution in short is that the informant on 6.4.1997 at about 1 p.m. returned from village pond after taking bath and saw that the appellants along with two others were demolishing outer wall of his house with the help of Gaita and Sabbal. It is further stated that the mother of the informant was raising alarm. It is further stated that after demolishing the wall, appellants entered inside the house and then Yudhisthir Rajwar (Appellant No. 1) put fire in the house, due to that a portion of the house of informant burnt. It is further alleged that due to wind, the flame spread towards the Khalihan of Yudhisthir Pandey and Kanhai Pandey and because of that heap of straw kept in their khalihan also burnt.

(3.) On the basis of aforesaid fardbeyan Chandan Keyari P.S. Case No. 30 of 1997 under sections 147, 149, 436 of the IPC registered against altogether 11 accused persons and police took up investigation. After, investigation, police submitted charge sheet against 10 accused persons, namely, Yudhisthir Rajwar, Koka Rajwar, Satan @ Satar Rajwar, Lodi Rajwar, Prema Rajwar, Ghashi Ram @ Sashi Ram Rajwar, Madan Rajwar, Manmath Rajwar, Rajan @ Raju Rajwar and Ashok Rajwar under sections 147, 148, 149, 436/435 of the IPC. Learned CJM, Bokaro took cognizance of the offence. Thereafter committed the case to the court of sessions. It then appears that the charges were framed against the aforesaid 10 accused persons under section 148, 427, 436 read with section 149 of the IPC and the same were explained to the accused persons, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. It further appears that during the trial, one of the accused, namely, Ashok Rajwar died, therefore case against him dropped. It appears that prosecution examined altogether eight witnesses in support of its case and also brought on record some documentary evidence