FAGUWA ORAON, MANGA @ MANGRA ORAON, GHANSIA ORAON @ GHARIA ORAON AND SUKRA ORAON Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR (NOW JHARKHAND)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. The petitioners are aggrieved by the Judgment dated 29.1.2000 passed by the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Gumla, in Criminal Appeal No. 8 of 1995, whereby the appeal filed against the Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence dated 24.1.1995, passed by Sri S.B. Ram, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gumla, in G.R. No. 373 of 1990/T.R. No. 145 of 1995, convicting and sentencing the petitioners has been dismissed by the learned Appellate Court below. It may be stated that the petitioner No. 3 Ghansia Oraon @ Gharia Oraon has been found guilty for the offences under Sections 324, 148 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code, and upon hearing on the point of sentence, he has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, simple imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 448 of the Indian Penal Code. whereas, rest of the petitioners have been found guilty and convicted for the offences under Sections 323, 147 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code, and they have been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, simple imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code and simple imprisonment for one month for the offence under Section 448 of the Indian Penal Code each, and all the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. The appeal filed against the said Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence has been dismissed by the learned Appellate Court below. Hence, this revision application.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 5.6.1990, the petitioners and one Jhatru Oraon, forming unlawful assembly and variously armed, came to the house of the informant and dragged the informant from the door of his house and assaulted him. When the daughter of the informant came to his rescue, she was also assaulted by sharp cutting weapon by Ghansia Oraon @ Ghana Oraon, causing injuries on her. Upon alarm raised, Kapil Singh, Bajo Singh and other villagers came to their rescue, whereupon the accused persons fled away. It is alleged that the occurrence had taken place due to previous enmity. The prosecution case was instituted on the basis of the written information given by the informant Taju Singh, on the basis of which, police case was instituted and investigation was taken up. After investigation, the police submitted the charge sheet against the petitioners, on the basis of which, cognizance was taken against them and ultimately, the petitioners were put to trial.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the impugned Judgments passed by the Courts below are absolutely illegal, inasmuch as, the independent witnesses have not been examined in the case and the enmity between the parties is admitted in the FIR itself. It has further been submitted that the investigating Officer of the case has not been examined, which has caused serious prejudice to the defense, and in the facts and circumstances of this case, the prosecution has not been able to prove the charge against the petitioners beyond all reasonable doubts. As such, it was not proper for the Courts below to have convicted and sentenced the petitioners only on the basis of the evidence of the interested witnesses, i.e., the informant and his daughter, particularly, when no independent witness has supported the case and even the wife of the informant has not been examined in the case. Learned counsel has accordingly, submitted that the impugned Judgments passed by the Courts below cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.