Manoj Ram vs State Of Bihar And Anr

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 03.10.2019, passed in SC/ST Case No. 162 of 2018 arising out of SC/ST P.S. Case No.

28 of 2018 registered whereby the Additional District & Sessions Judge I, Madhepura, acquitted the respondent no. 2, Manish Chandra Kumar, to the

charges under Sections 341, 323, 379 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and 3(i)(s), 3(i)(H) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention

of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and discharged him from the liabilities of his bail bond.

In brief, the prosecution case is that informant, Manoj Ram (appellant), was doing the work of mason, along with 4-5 labourers, since 6 to 7 months

in construction of Girija Kapildeo College. On 29.07.2016, informant, Manoj Ram (appellant), was engaged in construction work, along with 4-5

labourers. At about 02.00 p.m. Manish Chandra Kumar (respondent no. 2) and some unknown came there and started to abuse and caused assault

saying that why he is doing work, then, the respondent no. 2 replied that he is poor labourer and for livelihood he is doing the work of mason, then, he

was assaulted and his instruments worth Rs.2,000/-were kept. On hulla, several persons came and saved him.

In course of trial, prosecution examined altogether two witnesses, namely, informant Manoj Ram (appellant) and Dev Kumar, investigating officer

of the case.

On going through the evidence, as detailed in the impugned judgment, it appears that P.W. 1, Manoj Ram (appellant), who is the informant, did not

disclose the name of person, who engaged him for doing the work of construction of the College and he also did not disclose the boundary of the

College, which was being constructed, and he also showed his ignorance about the name of the writer of the fardbeyan.

The learned Additional Sessions Judge has discussed the evidence in detail and arrived at conclusion that prosecution has failed to prove the case

beyond all reasonable doubt and, accordingly, acquitted respondent no. 2 (Manish Chandra Kumar) from all charges.

I find no illegality or infirmity with the impugned judgment. This appeal is dismissed.