CHANDI SINGH MUNDA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred against the Judgment of Conviction and order of sentence dtd. 5/9/2003 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Seraikella, in S.T. No.363 of 1991, whereby the accused-appellants have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sec. 326/34 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years each with a fine of Rs.5,000.00 to be paid by each u/s 326 read with sec. 34 of the IPC.

(2.) The allegations against the appellant arose in the wake of the fardbayan of informant PW-4 Sanatan Karmakar that on 14/1/90, in the evening, he was returning to his home after playing football match and at about 5 pm, the accused persons intercepted him in the village near Bora Dam and assaulted the informant PW .. 4 by Bujali (a sharp cutting weapon) and lathi by which the informant sustained the injuries on his head,legs,body and hands. The informant afer being injured raised hulla and fell down at some distance. Having heard the hulla, local people like PW .. 1, PW - 2 and other persons arrived at the spot,then the accused persons fled away. The informant narrated the incident. On the information by PW .. 1 and PW .. 2, the father PW .. 3 also came at the spot and took the injured son PW .. 4 informant to the house. On the next day on 15/1/90 at 3 pm, police recorded the fardbeyan Ext.2 of the informant at P.H.C. Ichagarh. It is stated that about two years ago, there was an altercation between the fathers of the two sides on account of which, the accused persons had strong grudge against the informant family.

(3.) On the basis of the aforesaid fardbeyan of the informant PW .. 4, Ichagarh P.S. Case No.01 of 90 was registered against the two accused persons, in which, after due investigation, the police submitted the charge sheet interalia under Ss. 307/34 IPC and the cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. The accused persons denied the charges levelled against them and pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried and after trial, the learned court below passed the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, which is under challenge in this appeal.