SAMRAT GOPE Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred against the Judgment of Conviction and order of sentence dtd. 16/12/2003 passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Seraikella-Kharsawan, in S.T. No.17 of 2003, whereby the accused appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 323 of the Indian penal code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year, though charge was framed under Sec. 304 of IPC.

(2.) The allegations against the appellant arose in the wake of the statement dtd. 12/8/2002 of the informant Anjana Bagti (PW-1) who stated that last Wednesday at night (7/8/2002) that the Dulal Bagti (husband of the informant) came in the house in a drunken condition and slept. She further stated that he remained slept and lying on his bed for 3-4 days like a sick person. He was complaining of pain in chest and ribs. On 11/8/2002, he disclosed that in course of taking alcoholic liquor, the accused Samrat Gope had assaulted him with fists and as a result of which, he was feeling pain. He was taken to Dr. Kavi for treatment by them, who advised him to admit him in a government hospital, to which, he did not became ready and came back to his house and slept away and died at about 6 am in the morning on 12/8/2002. The informant has clearly mentioned in her FIR (Ext-2) that she was not in a position to say as to why the accused had assaulted her husband.

(3.) On the basis of the aforesaid statement of the informant, the FIR was lodged and a case was registered in Seraikella P.S. against the accused and investigation was taken up. After investigation, the police submitted the charge-sheet in this case, on the basis of which, cognizance of the offence was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. The accused has pleaded not guilty to the charge explained to him for the offence punishable under sec. 304 of IPC to which he denied the allegations levelled against him and after trial, the learned court below passed the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, which is under challenge in this appeal.