High Court
Case Details
Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.130 of 2006 [Against the judgment of conviction dated 07.01.2006 and order of sentence dated 09.01.2006 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-5, Deoghar in S.C. No.49 of 2004 arising out of Mohanpur P.S. No.188 of 2003 corresponding to G.R. Case No.728 of 2003] 1. Ibrahim Mian, Son of Late Jahur Mian ------ 2. Sakur Mian @ Sukrum Mian, late son of Jahur Mian 3. Tejo Mian, son of Late Tilo Mian 4. Hussaini Mian, son of late Tilo Mian 5. Ishaque Mian @ Ishaque Ansari, son of late Tilo Mian 6. Bhikan Mian, son of Chhabbi Mian 7. Baru Mian, son of late Sahdeo Mian 8. Gobardhan Mian, son of Baru Mian 9. Nepali Mian, son of Baru Mian 10. Gura Mian, son of Late Dukhan Mina 11. Tentu Mian, son of Gura Mian 12. Chhabbi Mian, son of Bijan Mian 13. Chiraguddin Mian, son of Puna Mian 14. Samaruddin Mian, son of Jahur Mian All resident of village-Mohana Kanari, P.S. Mohanpur, District-Deoghar .... .... …. Appellants Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Respondent ------ Cr. A(S.J.) No.130 of 2006 1
Legal Reasoning
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA PRESENT JUDGEMENT ------ For the Appellants : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jitendra Pandey, A.P.P. ------ 06/12/2024 By court: 1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 07.01.2006 and order of sentence dated 09.01.2006 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-5, Deoghar in S.C. No.49 of 2004 arising out of Mohanpur P.S. No.188 of 2003 corresponding to G.R. Case No.728 of 2003, whereby and whereunder, the appellants have been held guilty and convicted for the offences under Section 147, 426, 341 and 447, 324 r/w 149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years under sections 324/149 and R.I. for 2 years under section 147 of I.P.C. and sentenced to under R.I. for 1 years under section 379 of IPC. FACTUAL MATRIX 2. Factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that on 04.10.2003 at about 3:30 PM, when the informant’s brother was standing beside his house, then Chhabbi Mian came with his cattle and let the said cattle freed in the filed of the informant. Upon protest raised by the informant’s brother against the cattle freed in his Cr. A(S.J.) No.130 of 2006 2 field, Chhabbi Mian started abusing him with filthy language and attempted to assault but his brother fled away from there and narrated the said incident to the informant. In the meantime, Chhabbi Mian along with 13-14 persons armed with lathis, dandas, swords along with other deadly weapons attacked on the informant’s house and forcibly entered into his house and started assaulting him and his family members. Baddu Mian inflicted sword blows on the head of the informant and caused severe head injury. Chhabbi Mian also inflicted farsa blows on the head of the informant’s brother causing injury to him. Samaruddin Mian armed with tangi inflicted on Bishnu Mahto, Guda Mian also assaulted the informant’s bhabhi and her husband and caused injuries. It is also alleged that Bada Mian snatched away the wrist watch of the informant. After hearing commotion, the neighbours rushed towards informant’s house and saved him and his family members, then all the accused went away from the place of occurrence breaking the things lying in his house. 3. On the basis of above information, the FIR being Mohanpur P.S. Case No.188 of 2003 was registered against all the appellants for the offences under sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 324, 307, 379, 341, 504 and 427 of Indian Penal Code. After completion of the Cr. A(S.J.) No.130 of 2006 3 investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellants for the offences under sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 324, 307, 379, 341, 504 and 427 of Indian Penal Code. After taking cognizance, the case was committed to the court of Sessions and S.C. No.49 of 2004 was registered. The accused persons denied the charges and claimed to be tried. After conclusion of the trial, the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence of the appellants was passed, which has been assailed in this appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants without touching the merits of the judgment has confined herself to the point of non- extending the benefit of section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as ‘The Act of 1958’) to the appellants to which they deserve. It is further submitted that the injuries sustained by the informant are found to be simple in nature. It is further submitted that it was the first offence of the appellants and they have been never convicted for any offence, which has been mentioned in the impugned judgment and order. The learned trial court without recording any special reason has awarded substantive sentence of imprisonment, which is not justified under law. The appellants deserve the benefit of sections 3/4 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. Cr. A(S.J.) No.130 of 2006 4 5. On the other hand, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has raised no serious objection on the above point of argument rather defended the impugned judgment on merits. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence committed by the appellants, their age, character and antecedents, I deem it fit and expedient in the ends of justice to extend the benefit of section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 instead of undergoing the substantive sentence of imprisonment awarded by the learned trial court. Accordingly, the appellants are directed to appear before the concerned trial court within three months from the date of this judgment and the trial court is directed to release the appellants extending the provision under Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 upon furnishing bail bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand) each with one sureties with condition to maintain peace and good behavior for a period of one year from the date of furnishing bail bond. The concerned learned trial court be deem fit may call report from District Probation Officer. 7. In case of violation of aforesaid such terms and conditions, the appellants shall be called upon to receive the sentence of imprisonment already awarded to them by the learned trial court. Cr. A(S.J.) No.130 of 2006 5 8. In view of above discussion and reasons, this appeal is dismissed on merits with modification of sentence as stated above
Decision
9. Pending I.A(s), if any, is also disposed of accordingly. 10. Let the copy of this judgment along with Trial Court Record be sent back for information and needful. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) High Court Of Jharkhand, Ranchi 06./12/2024 Pappu/- N.A.F.R. Cr. A(S.J.) No.130 of 2006 6