Krishna Mahto & Ors. vs The State Of Jharkhand

By Court:-

Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned APP for the State.

The instant criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 22.09.2005 passed in S.T. No. 658 of 1993 by the learned Addl. Judicial Commissioner-III, Khunti, whereby and whereunder, the appellants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years along with a fine of Rs. 2000/- each for the offence under Section 324 of the IPC with default stipulation and further R.I. for one year each for the offence under Sections 148/149 of the IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

The factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that on 28.05.1993, at about 8:00AM, informant/complainant along with his brother Shivshankar Mahto were ploughing the field of their maternal grandmother to sow some paddy. In the meantime, all the above accused persons armed with lethal weapon came and forbade from ploughing the field and threatened with dire consequence and accused persons claimed the said filed as their own. Upon this, the informant told that it is the field of his maternal grandmother and on this trivial matter, altercation took place between them. The accused persons Koila Mahto and Madan Mahto gave a tangi blow on the head of the informant as a result of which blood started oozing out and he fell down. Accused person Krishna Mahto also gave a Farsa Blow upon the brother of the informant due to which he sustained injuries on his head and blood started to come out and he also fell down. Thereafter, all the accused persons assaulted both the injured brutally. Meanwhile, the other cultivators nearby namely Tusli Mahto, Aday Mahto, Krishna Mahto came to rescue but till then, all the accused persons fled away and the injured were brought to Police Station where F.I.R. was instituted.

On the basis of written complaint, Tamar P.S. Case No. 59 of 1993 was registered for the offence under Section 147, 148 & 307/34 of the IPC. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons and after taking cognizance, the case was committed to the court of Sessions, where S.T. No.658 of 1993 was registered. The accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to be quite innocent and pleaded that they were assaulted by the informant party against whom counter case Tamar P.S. Case No. 60 of 1993 was registered.

In course of trial, altogether six witnesses were examined by the prosecution apart from documentary evidence.

On the other hand, no oral testimony has been examined by the defence apart from some documentary evidence.

Learned counsel for the appellants without touching the merits of this judgment has confined his argument towards not extending the benefit of Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act to the appellants. He has submitted that appellants are entitled to be released under Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act being the first offenders. The learned trial Court has not recorded any specific reason as to why the appellants are not entitled to get the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act. Therefore, the present appellants deserve benefit of Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act. Moreover, the alleged occurrence is of the year 1993 and since then, they are facing the agony of the trial. It has also been submitted that the appellants have maintained peace and settled in their life. Therefore, the appellants may be extended the benefit of Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act.

Learned A.P.P. has defended the judgment of learned trial Court on merits but so far as extension of benefit of Probation of Offenders Act is concerned, it is fairly admitted that it was the first offence of the appellants, hence, appropriate order may be passed.

I have gone through the record of the case along with the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence in the light of the contentions raised on behalf of both side.

It appears that the learned trial court has held the appellants guilty for the offence under Sections 148, 149 & 324 of the I.P.C. and from perusal of evidence of prosecution witnesses, it appears that injured witnesses i.e. P.W.-3 Vishambher Mahto and P.W.-4 Kripa Mahto (victim-cum-informant) has proved the assault upon them by the accused persons which is also corroborated from the evidence of other witnesses i.e. P.W.-1, P.W.-2 and P.W.-5 and also from the evidence of Dr. Binod Kumar Pandit who had medically examined the injured. Therefore, the judgment of conviction passed by learned Trial Court is affirmed.

So far as sentence of the appellant is concerned, considering the overall factual background, genesis, manner, place and nature of offence committed by the appellants, their age, character and antecedent, it appears expedient in the ends of justice to extend them the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act of 1958, instead of awarding substantive sentence of imprisonment as awarded by the learned trial court.

In view of the above, this appeal is dismissed on merits with modification in sentence to the extent that instead of undergoing substantive sentence of imprisonment awarded to the appellants by learned Trial Court for the offence under Section 148, 149 & 324 of the I.P.C., the appellants are hereby directed to be released on furnishing bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 within two months from the date of this order for maintaining peace and be of good behavior for one year from the date of furnishing the bond.

If the bond is not furnished within above stipulated time, the learned trial Court shall issue notice upon the appellants to secure their attendance for furnishing the bond.

In case of violation of the terms and conditions of the bond, the appellants shall be called upon to receive the sentence of imprisonment already awarded to them by the learned trial Court.

Pending I.A.(s), if any, is also disposed of, accordingly.

Let a copy of this judgment along with Trial Court Record be sent back to the court concerned immediately for information and needful.