SANJAY MANDAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals have been preferred under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence awarded to them by Sessions Judge-1st, Rajmahal, District-Sehibganj in Sessions Trial No. 80 of 2007 whereby they have been punished mainly for the offence punishable under Section 302 to be read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. We have heard the counsel for both the sides and perused the record and proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 80 of 2007.

(2.) Looking to the evidences on record, there is prima facie case against both these appellants-accused. The case of the prosecution is based upon several eye witnesses who are P.W. 1, P.W. 3, P.W. 4, P.W. 5 and P.W. 8. Their depositions are constituting a prima facie case against these appellants. The role played by these two appellants have been narrated clearly by these eye witnesses. Moreover, their depositions are getting further corroboration by P.W. 9 who is Doctor Madhurendra Nath Sinha who has carried out post mortem of the deceased. There are firearm injury upon the body of the deceased.

(3.) Counsel appearing for the appellant, Sanjay Mandal (appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 307 of 2012) has submitted that there is no allegation of causing injury by firearm upon this appellant-accused and therefore, sentence awarded to him may be suspended and he is also acquitted from the charge under Section 307 to be read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. We are not inclined to accept this contention for suspension of sentence awarded to him under Section 302 to be read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code mainly for the reason that:--