BHARAT ORAWN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 4.8.2004 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Seraikella in Sessions Trial No. 183 of 1993, whereby both the appellants were convicted for the offences under Section 395 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/ - each.

(2.) CASE against the present appellants and other co -accused persons was registered on the basis of the fardbeyan (Ext 4) of the informant (PW 11) recorded on 13.1.1992 at about 9.00 p.m. The case of the prosecution, as per the fardbeyan of the informant, is that in the evening of 13.1.1992 at about 7.00 p.m. the informant was at his clothes shop situated at village Hat. Some customers were also present at the shop. At that time, about 7 -8 dacoits variously armed with pistols, bhujali and bombs entered into the informant's shop and threatened him as well as his brother and uncle and also the customers and the informant's driver. Two of the dacoits, whom the informant has named in his fardbeyan as Chitto Orawn and Bharat Orawn (present appellants), caught hold of the informant demanding the informant's gun and when the informant refused to deliver his gun, they beat him and took him to the adjacent road where other dacoits were present and were assaulting the informant's uncle (PW 10). The informant wanted to offer resistance by using his gun, then one of the dacoits Upendra Orawn assaulted the informant with the butt of his pistol, while the appellant Bharat Orawn snatched away the informant's gun from his hand. The dacoits committed loot and arson and robbed the informant of his cash amounting to Rs. 22,000/ - besides his wrist watch, clothes worth Rs. 5,000/ -, woolen sheets and the informant's DBBL gun. The loot continued for about 20 minutes and it was only when the inmates of the informant's family shot at the dacoits, culprits took to their heels. While the informant could identify the present two appellants amongst the dacoits, his brother (PW 4) and uncle (PW 10) had also identified two more amongst the gang of dacoits. On receipt of the information, police arrived at the place of occurrence, though by that time, culprits had made good their escape. After recording fardbeyan of the informant, the Investigating Officer inspected the place of occurrence and seized empty cartridges, one live bomb and remnants of exploded bombs in presence of witnesses and prepared seizure list of seized materials.

(3.) CHARGE -sheet was submitted at the conclusion of the investigation on the basis of which, cognizance for the offences under Section 395 of the IPC was taken against the accused persons including the present appellants. Though, charge -sheet has been submitted against several co - accused persons, but trial could be conducted only against four including the present two appellants and two others namely, Upendra Orawn and Arjun Orawn.