KHEDAN HAZAM Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Revision has been preferred by the petitioners against the order dated 21.6.2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, FTC No. IV Bokaro in S.T. No. 453 of 2006 whereby and where under the learned trial court below dismissed their petition filed under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and refused to discharge them.

(2.) THE prosecution story in short was that on 6.6.2006 when the accused Guleshwar Thakur was digging foundation 6' inside the land of the informant which was earlier measured and a pillar was installed, the informant opposed, as a result at which he was assaulted by Guleshwar Thakur and his associates. It was alleged in the Fardbeyan that Guleshwar Thakur attacked on the informant with shovel to which when he attempted to ward of such attack, he sustained injury on his left temporal. The accused Shukar Thakur assaulted with rod and other accused persons inflicted blow with sticks as a result of which he sustained in his legs and different parts of his body. He further sustained injuries from the stones and bricks pelted by Matuk Thakur, Madhu Thakur, Madan Thakur, Charku Thakur, Andu Thakur and Kali Thakur. On alarm there being raised by the informant his son and the witnesses arrived, witnessed the occurrence, pacified the matter and removed the informant to the police station in his state of unconsciousness. The specific allegation against the petitioners was that they had inflicted blows with sticks on the legs of the informant, who had arrived at the place of occurrence later.

(3.) MR . Laljee Sahay, further submitted that the specific allegation against the petitioners was of attributing stick blows on the legs of the informant but without corresponding injuries. It was alleged that the informant was assaulted by four accused with sticks on his legs but without proportionate quantitative injuries. Similarly, the informant implicated ten persons including the petitioners with their attribution in different manner but without any grievous injury in spite of the allegation that some of them had used heavy and blunt weapons like shovel, Axe etc. and had there been intention of the accused persons to eliminate him, there was no intervening circumstance to prevent them and therefore, offence as alleged did not constitute the offence under Sections 325/307 IPC against any of them. Besides, according to the prosecution case, the accused persons had appeared at the scene at different stages with different intention without concert of mind and therefore, the alleged offence could not be inferred to be given effect to in prosecution of common object so as to shaddle criminal liability upon the petitioners also.