MUKESH NAYAK Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These criminal appeals have been directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 14.02.2007 & 17.02.2007 respectively, passed by Sri Rai Satish Bahadur, Addl. Judl. Commissioner No. XVIth, Ranchi in connection with Sessions Trial No.442 of 2004, corresponding to G.R. No.546 of 2004 arising out of Bariyatu (Gonda) P.S. Case No.31 of 2004 dated 06.02.2004 whereby the appellants have been held guilty for the offence punishable under Sec. 394 and 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life under Section 394 of Indian Penal Code and further to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/each and in default of making payment of fine further R.I. for one year. The appellants have further been sentenced to undergo R.I. for life and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/each for the offence punishable under Sec. 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine further R.I. for one year.

(2.) The case of prosecution, as it appears from the fardbeyan of Sitaram Sharma (PW5), recorded on 26.02.2004 at about 7.30 a.m. at Jhigri Tola, in brief, is that between intervening night of 25/26.02.2004 the informant with his family members was making plan to go to their native village on the eve of Holi festival. The informant noticed presence of certain persons near the gate of his house while he had come out from the room for urinating. The informant tried to know the identity of those persons but they threatened him to keep quite and go inside the house. The matter was brought to the notice of other family members where after they also came out from the room and tried to know identity of those persons assembled near the gate. The miscreants disclosed that they had come to search a criminal and they are staff of police station. On some pretext and also on the point of gun the miscreants got the gate opened, entered into the house and committed robbery. The miscreants were four in number and they were armed with pistol, gun etc. In course of commission of robbery Parshuram Sharma was shot dead. After the miscreants left the place of occurrence, alarm was raised which attracted neighbouring people to assemble there. The informant and other witnesses disclosed about the incident to neighbouring people. The matter was also informed to police, fardbeyan of Sitaram Sharma was recorded and Bariyatu (Gonda) P.S. Case No.31 of 2004 under Sec. 394 & 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against unknown miscreants.

(3.) The appellants have assailed the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence on the ground that Investigating Officer has done perfunctory investigation under the influence of informant party. The physical description of dacoits, as given by the informant and other witnesses, do not tally with the appearance of the appellants. The Investigating Officer to prove his ability, had apprehended the appellants and other accused and to prove their involvement in the alleged robbery, made the witnesses convinced and got the appellants identified in T.I. Parade which was not done in accordance with law. The appellants were taken on police remand on 22.04.2004 and sent back to jail on 23.04.2004 i.e. on the very following day. The purpose of taking the appellants on police remand and bringing them to the police station was only with an intention to show them to the witnesses so that the witnesses could be able to identify the appellants in T.I. Parade and that is what has happened. PW2 and PW5 have admitted in their deposition that arrest of the appellants was brought to their notice and their names were also disclosed by the I.O. to PW2. The defence witness DW1 has corroborated this fact that the appellants were shown to the witnesses by the police when they were taken on police remand.