GANESH RAM CHANDER SAO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Vandana Bharti, learned A.P.P. for the State.

(2.) This application is directed against the judgment, dated 9-6-2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC I, Hazaribagh in connection with Criminal Appeal No. 107 of 2003 whereby and where under the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Hazaribagh in G.R. No. 2471 of 1998 convicting the petitioner under Section 414 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for 2 years has been affirmed.

(3.) It has been submitted that the seizure has not been proved in view of the fact that the seizure list witnesses P.Ws. 1 and 2 have not supported the seizure. The entire prosecution case is based on the evidence of P.W.1-informant. He further submitted that the petitioner deals in scrap. He further submits that there is no theft report and since the basic ingredients of Section 414 of IPC is lacking and such circumstances has not been considered by either the learned trial Court or by the learned appellate Court. He also submitted that the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Court and affirmed by the learned appellate court thus deserves to be quashed and set aside. An alternative argument has been put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner that if this Court is not inclined to interfere with the judgment of conviction, the period of sentence imposed upon the petitioner be substantially reduced considering the fact that the petitioner is facing the rigors of prosecution case since the year 1998 and has remained in custody for about 6 months.