DILIP GOPE Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.12.2009 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no.-1, Bokaro in S.T. No. 52 of 2004 whereby the appellants were convicted under sections 341 and 325 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo R.I. two years and fine of Rs. 1000/- each under section 325/34 IPC and in default of payment of fine amount, two months S.I. No separate sentence has been awarded under section 341 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The case of the prosecution as disclosed from the fardbeyan of PW4, Madhusudan Gope dated 17.4.2003 at 8:30 p.m. at Bhojudih O.P. is that on the same day at about 5:30 p.m. the informant was sitting at his door when the accused persons came there and started abusing him for not allowing them to take water from the well and said that why he dig the well in his land, then the informant told that he had dug the well in his own land then they brought lathi and one iron rod from their home and started assaulting him. When he ran into his house in order to save himself. They also came inside the house and started assaulting him, his wife also sustained injury when she came to his rescue. According to the informant when both of them raised hulla, the neighbouring people also came there and when he fell down then the accused persons fled away. He sustained injuries on both his legs, behind his head and on the right hand. The cause of incident is that he dug a well in his land. It is also stated that his left hand has been amputated since earlier.

(3.) On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant, Chandankiyari P.S. Case No. 28 of 2003 was registered. Thereafter the police had taken up investigation and submitted the charge-sheet under sections 341,323,325,448,307/34 IPC against the accused persons. Cognizance was taken and case was committed to the court of Sessions. Charges were framed under sections 448,341,325 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The defence of the accused was denial and they pleaded their innocence and sought to be tried. Accordingly, trial was held as many as six prosecution witnesses have been examined by the prosecution and at the conclusion of the trial the accused persons were convicted and sentenced as aforesaid. Hence, the appeal.