Dismissed

Md Sakir v. The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Jharkhand HC6 Jul 2018Cr.A(SJ)/1660/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the appellant's Special Leave Petition and Criminal Appeal against the Trial Court's acquittal on serious charges under IPC Sections 147, 148, 149, and 307. The appellate bench upheld the acquittal due to simple nature of injuries and lack of examination of key witnesses, dismissing the plea to review sentence benefits.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment acquitting respondents on serious charges is upheld; leave to appeal and criminal appeal dismissed.

Md Sakir Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 1660 of 2017 With

¶3

I.A. No. 151 of 2018.

¶4

------Md. Sakir .… Appellant -Versus1. State of Jharkhand 2. Md. Tasleem 3. Md. Haseeb ..... Respondents

¶5

------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.B. MANGALMURTI

¶6

------For the Appellant : : M/s. Mohammad Asghar For the State : : M/s. Hardeo Prasad Singh For the Respondents 2 & 3 : : None -------

¶7

9/ 06.07.2018. Heard learned counsel for the informant appellant and the learned counsel for the State. No one appears for the accused respondents even though they were noticed and they have appeared through advocate.

¶8

The informant appellant is aggrieved by the impugned Judgement of conviction and Order of sentence dated 10.08.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,-XIII, Hazaribag, in S.T. No. 36 of 2011 / 82 of 2012, whereby the accused respondents, who were put to trial for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 341 / 149, 323 / 149 and 307 / 149 of the Indian Penal Code, have been found guilty and convicted only for the offences under Sections 323, 341 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and have been acquitted of the charges for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Upon hearing on the point of sentence the accused respondents were given the benefits of Probation of Offenders Act. The informant appellant is aggrieved mainly by the fact that the accused respondents were acquitted of the charge for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶9

I.A No.151 of 2018 has been filed by the appellant, seeking leave to appeal against the said Judgment dated 10.8.2017 passed in Sessions Trial No.36 of 2011 / 82 of 2012, acquitting the accused respondents of the charges under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶10

According to the prosecution case, the occurrence had taken place on 08.07.2010 at about 8:00 P.M., when the informant appellant was returning back from the market of his village. He had reached near the house of one Umesh Ram, when it is alleged that both the accused respondents along with their other family members armed with lathi , danda, bujali and kulhari, came there and started assaulting the informant. Upon the alarm raised by the informant, his wife Kasida Bano and daughter Sahnaz Khatoon also came to his rescue, and the accused persons also assaulted and injured them, and took away Rs.5000/- and one Citizen Watch from the possession of the

¶11

-2-

¶12

informant. The informant stated that with the help of the villagers, they were brought to the hospital, where his fardbeyan was recorded by the police and the police case was instituted.

¶13

The accused respondents were ultimately put to trial and the impugned Judgment shows that the prosecution has examined six witnesses, including the Doctor, who had examined the injuries of the injureds, and the I.O., of the case.

¶14

The defence case was that there was enmity between the parties for a well, for which, there were cases earlier also, and in order to grab the said well, the accused persons have been falsely implicated by the informant.

¶15

It appears from the impugned Judgment that the material witnesses have supported the prosecution case and the Doctor, P.W.-5 Dr. Rajesh Kumar Gupta, who had examined the injuries of the injureds, have also proved the injuries of the injureds. The impugned Judgment shows that two of the injureds, namely, Kasida Bano, the wife of the informant, and his daughter, Sahnaz Khatoon were not examined by the prosecution. The Court below has found that injuries on all the injureds were only simple in nature, though on the informant and his wife, the injuries were found on the head also.

¶16

On the basis of the evidence on record, particularly, taking into consideration the fact that the injuries on the injureds were only simple in nature, and two injureds, namely, Kasida Bano and Sahnaz Khatoon were not examined in the case, the Trial Court below has acquitted the accused respondents for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, and has convicted them only for the offences under Sections 323, 341 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and upon hearing on the point of sentence, has given them the benefits of Probation of Offenders Act.

¶17

Learned counsel for the informant appellant has submitted that the impugned Judgment passed by the Trial Court below, cannot be sustained in the eyes of law, and this was a fit case, in which, the accused respondents ought to have been convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 307 as well, in view of the fact that the injuries were found on the head of the informant as well as on the head of his wife. It is also submitted that the wife was referred to RIMS, Ranchi, subsequently.

¶18

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer.

¶19

There is nothing on the record to show that treatment of the wife of the informant was done at RIMS, Ranchi. Neither any prescription or any injury report from the RIMS, Ranchi, has been brought on record, nor any Doctor from the RIMS, Ranchi, has been examined. The evidence on record clearly show that there were only simple injuries on all the three injured, and two of the injureds, namely, the wife and the daughter of the informant, were not examined in the Court below.

¶20

-3-

¶21

We are of the considered view that on the basis of the materials on record, the Trial Court below has rightly convicted the accused respondents only for the offences under Sections 323, 341 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and given them the benefits of the Probation of Offenders Act.

¶22

We do not find any such inherent illegality and / or irregularity in the impugned Judgment passed by the Trial Court below, acquitting the accused respondents from the charges under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, so as to call for any interference by this Court.

¶23

Since we do not find any illegality in the impugned Judgment passed by the Trial Court below, there is no question of granting any leave to appeal against the Judgment of acquittal of the accused respondents for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149 & 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, I.A No.151 of 2018 seeking leave to appeal, stands dismissed.

¶24

Consequently, this appeal also stands dismissed, being bereft of any merit.

¶25

(B.B. Mangalmurti, J.)

¶26

D.S./B.S.

Md Sakir v. The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md Sakir v. The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ropna Munda Vs State of Bihar

Ghandhi Oraon Gandhi Oraon And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand

Mangal Samad Vs State of Jharkhand

Karma Oraon Vs State of Bihar

Bijay Murmu Bijay Soren Vs State of Jharkhand

Prem Alias Premjeet Alias Prem Sahu Alias Premjeet Sahu Vs State of Jharkhand

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Ropna Munda Vs State of Bihar

Ghandhi Oraon  Gandhi Oraon And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand

Mangal Samad Vs State of Jharkhand

Karma Oraon Vs State of Bihar

Bijay Murmu  Bijay Soren Vs State of Jharkhand

Prem Alias Premjeet Alias Prem Sahu Alias Premjeet Sahu Vs State of Jharkhand

Ghandhi Oraon Gandhi Oraon And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand

Bijay Murmu Bijay Soren Vs State of Jharkhand