NAVIRASUL SHEIKH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 1.2.2003 and 3.2.2003 respectively passed by Sri Nalin Kumar, learned Additional Sessions Judge-Fast Track Court No. III, Garhwa in S.T. No. 307 of 1999 whereby and where-under appellants have been convicted u/s 323,325/34 of the I.P.C. and have been directed to furnish bond with one surety of Rs. 5,000/for maintaining peace and good behaviour and keeping peace for a period of two years under section 360 of Crimial P.C. and Sec. 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act,1958.

(2.) The prosecution case as stated by the informant Hamid Sheikh, in brief, is that on 4.11.1998 at about 8 a.m. Navirasul, Immamuddin, Taimuddin, and Masaruddin had destroyed the "aari" by cutting earth from his field and was fencing the same by thorny bushes which resulted in putting barricade in his pathway. Maseruddin was armed with Tangi while the other accused persons were armed with lathi. When he and his brother Shafik asked them from desisting from the fencing work, Navirasul Sheikh told others to kill both of them. Taimuddin and Immamuddin assaulted him by lathi while Navirasul and Masaruddin started assaulting his brother. Taimuddin assaulted him on his head by lathi due to which he fell down while Masaruddin who was earlier assaulting his brother assaulted him by a tangi due to which he received injuries on his head and on his buttock. Taimuddin and Immamuddin assaulted him uninterruptedly by lathi. Navirasul injured his brother by assault from lathi. When his wife Nurjahan Bibi along with his mother came to protect him, all the four accused persons also assaulted and injured them. This occurrence was being seen by Alamgir Ansari and Shailun Ansari.

(3.) On the basis of the fardbeyan, Garhwa P.S. Case No. 209 of 1998 was registered. Investigation was conducted and the accused were chargesheeted, cognizance was taken and the C.J.M., Garhwa committed the case to the court of Sessions. Charges were framed against all the four accused under section 341,323,324 and 307/34 IPC, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.