NARESH SAHU Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ms. Amrita Banerjee, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned A.P.P., for the State.

(2.) This application is directed against the judgment dated 29.04.2005 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, Fast Track Court No. IV, Ranchi in Criminal Appeal No. 204 of 2004 whereby and whereunder the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31.07.2004 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ranchi in G. R. Case No. 136 of 2003 by which the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304A, 427 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to various terms has been affirmed.

(3.) It has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that none of the witnesses have been able to identify the driver of the tempo which had caused the accident. It has also been stated that the Motor Vehicle Inspector was also not produced by the prosecution to throw the light on the fact as to whether the tempo was examined by the Motor Vehicle Inspector or not. Learned counsel further submits that most of the witnesses are related to the deceased and, therefore, interested witnesses and their testimony cannot be relied upon by the prosecution. An alternative argument has been put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner that if this Court is not inclined to interfere in the judgment of conviction the period of sentence be reduced considering the fact that the petitioner has remained in custody for a period of about two months and has been facing the rigors of the prosecution case for more than a decade.