BHADE MUNDA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 27.9.2002 and 28.9.2002 respectively passed by 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in S.T. No. 363 of 1998 whereby and whereunder the appellants were convicted under Section 395 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years.

(2.) The case of prosecution in short is that on 11.12.1997 at about 11 p.m. when the informant along with his family members were sleeping inside their house, appellant Bhade Munda knocked his door. Whereupon his wife woke up opened the door. It is stated that appellant Bhade Munda asked about the informant and when the informant's wife disclosed that he was sleeping, he asked her to call him. It is further alleged that thereafter informant came out of his house and went with Bhade Munda near a mango tree, where he found that seven persons were sitting out of them he identified one Suresh Munda in the light of torch. It is further stated that on being directed by aforesaid persons he called Bodhan Sao, Seetan Sao and Badho Sao and went near mango tree. Thereafter the miscreants told that they will hold meeting in the house of informant and then all had gone to the house of informant. It further alleged that thereafter informant and his co-villagers were locked in a room. It is further alleged that thereafter the aforesaid persons committed dacoity in the house of informant and other co-villagers, namely, Bodhan Sao, Arun Sao and Barho Sao.

(3.) On the basis of statement of informant, Barkagaon P.S. Case No. 94 dated 13.12.1997 instituted under Section 395 of the IPC and police took up investigation. It appears that after investigation, police submitted charge sheet against Suresh Munda and Bhade Munda and six unknown under Section 395 of the IPC. After cognizance, case committed to the court of sessions. After Commitment, charge framed against the appellants under Section 395 of the IPC and same was explained to them to which appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereafter prosecution examined altogether 12 witnesses in support of its case. The prosecution also brought on record Fard Beyan (Ext.-1), Formal FIR (Ext.-2), Signature of informant on the Fardbeyan (Ext.-1/1), Forwarding note on the Fard Beyan (Ext.-1/2), and endorsement made on the Fard Byan (Ext. -1/3). After close of the case of prosecution, both the appellants examined under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which their defence is of total denial. It then appears that the learned court below after considering the materials available on record, convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid, against that present appeal filed.