OM PRAKASH OJHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.5.2002 passed by Shri Gautam Mahapatra, Additional Sessions Judge, FTC -IV, Bokaro, in Sessions Trial No. 116 of 1998 by which judgment learned Additional Sessions Judge found the appellants guilty under Sections 326/34 and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for three years.

(3.) IT is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the prosecution case was started against Om Prakash Ojha along with two appellants Shiv Prakash Ojha and Shashi Bhushan Tiwari stating therein that they had gone to the shop of the informant Manoj Kumar Tiwari then Om Prakash Ojha assaulted him with sword by which the informant received injury on his head which has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, as independent witness PW 1 Umesh Mishra has not supported the said fact and the injury report which has been the basis of conviction under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code is doubtful, document since it has been admitted by the I.O. in his evidence at Para 30 that the injury report which was forwarded by him bears the name of Mahesh Kumar Tiwari, which was subsequently cut and Manoj Tiwari has been altered. The defence has brought Ext. B to prove that even in the hospital registered the person who was examined was Mahesh Tiwari not the informant Manoj Kumar Tiwari. Moreover he has relied on the finding of Chief Judicial Magistrate before whom the informant was produced, since he was accused in the counter case, Balidih P.S. Case No. 97 of 1996 and on the very next day of the occurrence the Chief Judicial Magistrate found no injury on the head and in that view of the matter the injury report is a doubtful document and can not be relied.