MD AFTARUL HAQUE Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Ankit Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned APP appearing for the State.

(2.) This application is directed against the judgment dtd. 9/2/2009 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 26 of 2007 by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Pakur, whereby and whereunder, the judgment of conviction and sentence dtd. 12/6/2007 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Pakur in G.R. No. 63 of 2006 (T.R. No. 59 of 2007), convicting the petitioners for the offence punishable u/s 414 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) has been affirmed while setting aside the conviction u/s 379 I.P.C. and sentenced the petitioners to S.I. for 02 years.

(3.) The prosecution story in brief is that on 15/2/1996 when the informant was on patrolling duty he has received information that miscreants had gone towards Malpahari temple with a truck bearing registration No. BHJ-4786 for committing theft of iron. It has been alleged that the informant along with Hawaldar Nasim Khan proceeded by motorcycle towards Malpahari railway crossing to keep watch over the truck bearing registration No. BHJ-4786. It has been alleged that at about 2.30 a.m. the truck was returning back when the informant signaled the driver to stop but in spite of the same the truck driver started fleeing away with the truck which resulted in chase being made by the informant. Further allegation has been levelled that when the truck reached near village Devpur, at that time ASI of Hiranpur P.S. was coming from opposite direction and then the accused stopped the truck and started fleeing away but on chase five miscreants were apprehended and from the truck iron plates were seized. Based on the aforesaid allegation G.R. Case No. 63 of 2006 was instituted. Investigation resulted in submission of charge-sheet against the accused persons u/s 379 and 414 I.P.C. After cognizance was taken charges were framed u/s 379 and 414 I.P.C. to which the accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Since co-accused Nejam Sk absconded his trial was separated and the trial proceeded against six accused persons.