BALRAM TUDU Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision is directed against the judgment dated 30.11.2007, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum, Ghatshila in Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2005, by which the appeal preferred by the Petitioners against their conviction by the learned SDJM, Ghatshila in C/1 Case No. 93 of 2000, corresponding to T.R. No. 921 of 2005, by which they were held guilty, was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed. The learned SDJM, Ghatshila held the Petitioners (1) Balram Tudu (2) Laso Tudu @ Laxmi Tudu (3) Sunaram Tudu and (4) Krishna Sardar guilty for the offence under Section 143 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of four months. They Were further held guilty for the offence under Sections 429/34 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. Petitioner No. 5 Chandrai Tudu was also held guilty but no substantive sentence was awarded to him except that he was directed to be released on execution of the probation bond of Rs. 5000/- with two sureties for a period of one year for maintaining peace and be of good behaviour. Sentences awarded to the other four Petitioners were directed to run concurrently. Their conviction and sentence awarded by the trial court was affirmed in appeal as already mentioned.

(2.) Prosecution story as narrated by the complainant-informant Hopna Tudu was that in the night of 11.4.1996 at about 7:00 p.m. one Gopal Kalindi had visited towards the government pond to answer the call of nature where he spotted the Petitioner Balram Tudu returning from the pond side briskly with a bottle in his hand followed by other Petitioners Laso Tudu @ Laxmi Tudu, Sunaram Tudu, - Krishna Sardar, Chandrai Tudu and one Motilal Sardar (not the Petitioner herein) in the light of torch he was carrying. The witnesses came near the pond on alarm along with the informant-complainant and found the fishes of the pond jumping and some of the fishes floating presumed to be died. A written report was presented by Hopna Tudu at the Ghatshila police station, to which Ghatshila P.S. Case No. 44/96 was instituted on 14.4.1996 for the alleged offence under Sections 429/34 of the Indian Penal Code, however, after investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted final form exonerating the criminal liability of the accused as the allegation was not found to be true. A notice was issued to the informant whereupon the informant appeared and filed a protest petition which was registered as complaint case. During course of inquiry, one of the accused Motilal Sardar died. A prima facie case under Sections 429/34 of the Indian Penal Code was found against all the five accused, who are the Petitioners herein and ultimately, charge was framed against them under Sections 147/429/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Learned senior counsel Mr. M.K. Dey submitted that there is error of record in the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum, Ghatshila in Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 2005 wherein he observed,