YADAV MAJI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned Counsel for the State. No one appears for the complainant opposite party No. 2 in spite of the fact that on earlier occasion, due to non-appearance of the complainant opposite party No.2, the case was adjourned for giving a chance to the counsel for the complainant opposite party No. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the Judgement dated 31.03.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Jamtara, in Criminal Appeal No. 34/141 of 2000, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against his conviction and sentence for the offence u/ss. 494, 379 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code, by the Judgement dated 18.09.2000 passed by Shri Ajay Kumar Sharma, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamtara, in C.R. No. 71 of 1992 / T.R. No. 31 of 2000, has been allowed in part by the learned Appellate Court below. It may be stated that by the Trial Court the petitioner was found guilty for the offences u/ ss. 494, 379 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and was convicted for the same and upon hearing on the point of sentence the petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and six months and fine of Rs.500/- for each of the offences u/ss. 494 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine he was to undergo simple imprisonment for two months in addition to the term of sentence awarded. The petitioner was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence u/s 379 of the Indian Penal Code and the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) Upon appeal, the Appellate Court below has acquitted the petitioner for the charges u/s 379 and 494 of the Indian Penal Code, but maintained the conviction and sentence against the petitioner for the offence u/s 498A of the Indian Penal Code and has allowed the appeal in part.

(3.) The petitioner, along with other co-accused persons have been made accused in P.C.R. Case No. 71 of 1992, filed by the Putul Rani Maji, the wife of the petitioner Yadav Maji, in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamtara, then in the District of Dumka. It appears that the petitioner was made accused in this case along with his family members and one Maya Maji, who could not be put to trial. The complainant petition available in the Lower Court Record clearly shows that the same was filed with respect to the occurrence which had taken place on 12.03.1992 at Kalyaneswari Temple and subsequently on 27.03.1992 at village- Banbistupur, (P.S. Uttan Dhadhka) to Gorainala More (P.S. Mihijam) on Jamtara-Mihijam Road.