AZAD ANSARI Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the appellants and learned Counsel for the state.

(2.) The instant appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 18.3.2002 and order of sentence dated 21.3.2002 passed by Sri Dilip Kumar Sinha, Sessions Judge, Lohardaga in S.T. No. 385 of 1998|32 of 1998 by which judgment appellant has been found guilty for the offence Under Section 307 and 394 of the I.P.C and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 8 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- Under Section 307 of the I.P.C and in default further imprisonment for one year. He was further sentenced to undergo R.I. for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default further imprisonment of one year Under Section 394 of the I.P.C. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(3.) It is submitted by leaned counsel for the appellant that identification of the accused by the prosecution witnesses is fully doubtful. The informant, who had no source of light stated that she identified the accused by his voice, while P.W.5 has stated that he identified the accused in the light of torch and torch light had fallen on the back of the accused. He has no occasion to see the accused by his face. He has also stated that even the time of occurrence has been given by the informant and P.W.5 contrary to each other and as such the conviction of the appellant is bad in law and fit to be set aside.