JOSEPH HEMBRAM Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present criminal appeal has already been admitted by this Court vide order dated 8th November, 2012. Record and proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 175 of 2007 was called from the concerned trial Court so as to appreciate the arguments for suspension of sentence, awarded by the trial Court to the appellants. Record and proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 175 of 2007 have been received and we have perused the same.

(2.) HAVING heard counsel for both the sides and perusing the records and proceedings of the sessions trial and also looking to the evidences on record, it appears that there is a prima facie case against appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4. As the criminal appeal is pending, we are not much analyzing the evidences on record, but, suffice it to say that the case of the prosecution is based upon eye - witness, who is P.W.3. The deposition of P.W.3 has enough corroboration by the depositions of other prosecution witnesses especially deposition of P.W. 1, who is Dr. Singroy Soren. Looking to deposition of P.W.3, it appears that he has given the names of appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4, who are original accused Nos. 2, 3 and 4, but, P.W.3 in his deposition has not given name of appellant No. 1, who is original accused No. 1.

(3.) SO far as appellant No. 1, who is original accused No. 1, namely Joseph Hembram is concerned, it appears that there is a prima facie case in favour of appellant No. 1.