Prafulla Bora @ Gauri Bhusan Bora Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

The present revision petition has been instituted assailing the judgment dated 13.05.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jorhat in Criminal Appeal No. 10/2013, upholding the conviction of the petitioner, herein, by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S), Jorhat vide judgment dated 18.02.2013, in GR Case No.718/08 under Section 323 IPC and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for 1(one) month. The Appellate Court had acquitted the petitioner from the charge under Section 341 IPC.

¶21

The prosecution case in brief is that on 26.07.2008 at about 6.15 p.m., the accused petitioner, herein, had stopped the school-cum-staff bus of Tocklai Experimental Station near Dhekiajuli Namgar, Na Ali, while it was returning from Dhekiajuli to Toklai, after dropping office staff and had assaulted one Deba Karmakar, Handiman of the bus without any cause or reason. The victim sustained injuries leading to filing of an FIR by the respondent no. 2 herein on 27.06.2008 itself. The said FIR was registered as Titabor PS Case No. 90/08 under Sections 341/325 IPC.

¶22

On the completion of investigation, the police laid a chargesheet against the petitioner, herein, under Sections 341/325 IPC. On conclusion of the trial held in the matter, the learned Trial Court vide judgment dated 18.02.2013 proceeded to convict the petitioner herein under Sections 341/323 IPC and sentenced him accordingly.

¶23

The petitioner being aggrieved, assailed the judgment dated 18.02.2013, passed by the learned Trial Court, by instituting an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 10/2013, before the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat. The said

¶24

Page No.# 3/5

¶25

criminal appeal was considered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jorhat. The learned Appellate Court, upon considering the evidences coming on record, proceeded vide judgment dated 13.05.2014, to acquit the petitioner, herein, from the charge under Section 341 IPC. However, the conviction of the appellant under Section 323 IPC by the learned Trial Court was upheld. Upon upholding the conviction of the petitioner under Section 323 IPC, the petitioner, herein, was sentenced under Section 323 IPC, to undergo imprisonment for a period of 1(one) month.

¶26

Being aggrieved, the petitioner has instituted the present revision petition.

¶27

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.

¶28

As the petitioner has been acquitted from the charge under Section 341 IPC, the conclusions drawn by the learned Trial Court with regard to the said charge is not considered, the learned Trial Court, upon appreciating the evidences coming on record, had proceeded to convict the petitioner under Section 323 IPC. This Court has perused the conclusions drawn by the learned Trial Court and finds that the said conclusions have been drawn on a due and proper examination of the evidences coming on record and no infirmity is found therein. The Appellate Court has also, upon appreciating the evidences coming on record, found the charge under Section 323 IPC to be established against the petitioner herein. The conclusions of the Appellate Court on being examined, it is found that the same is also based on a due and proper appreciation of the evidences coming on record and no infirmity is found therein. In view of the above conclusions, the conviction of the petitioner, herein, under Section 323 IPC stands affirmed.

¶29

Page No.# 4/5

¶30

This Court notices that the offence was committed by the petitioner on 27.06.2008. Around 17 years have passed since the date of commission of the said offence by the petitioner herein. The materials brought on record does not reveal that the petitioner, herein, was involved in the commission of a similar nature of offence either prior to 27.06.2008 and / or thereafter. This Court also finds that the petitioner has been litigating the matter for the last around 18 years, initially before the learned Trial Court, thereafter before learned the Appellate Court and presently before this Court in the present revision of the petitioner.

¶31

In view of the delay occasioning in the matter since the date of commission of the offence by the petitioner, herein, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner herein is entitled to be extended the benefit under the provisions of the Probation of the Offenders Act 1958.

¶32

Accordingly, for the reasons recorded hereinabove, the petitioner herein, is given the benefit under the Act of 1958 and the sentence modified to the effect that instead of sending the petitioner to jail, he should be given the benefit under the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

¶33

In view of the above discussion, it is directed that the petitioner herein will file two sureties to the tune of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand), along with a personal bond before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (Sadar), Jorhat and undertake to the effect that the petitioner herein, shall maintain peace and good behaviour during the period of 1 (one) year from the date of filing of the bond.

¶34

The aforesaid bond be filed by the petitioner within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of this order.

¶35

Page No.# 5/5

¶36

With the above observations and directions, the present criminal revision petition stands disposed of.

¶37

Send down the records of the case to the learned Trial Court along with a copy of this order for information and necessary action.

¶38

JUDGE

¶39

Comparing Assistant

Prafulla Bora @ Gauri Bhusan Bora v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prafulla Bora @ Gauri Bhusan Bora v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjib Ghosh @ Piklo Vs the State of Assam

Thaken Das Vs the State of Assam

Joyguru Barman and 2 Ors. Vs the Union of India

Alauddin Ahmed and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Puniram Das and 4 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Dipen Bania Vs State of Assam