Dharma @ Dharamdeo Sao & Ors vs State Of Bihar on 20 June, 2011

0
164
Patna High Court
Dharma @ Dharamdeo Sao & Ors vs State Of Bihar on 20 June, 2011
Author: Smt. Anjana Prakash
                  Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.55 OF 1996

       (Appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 23.3.1996 passed
       by the 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Patna, in Sessions Trial No.
       263 of 1992)
                                       ------------

1. DHARMA @ DHARAMDEO SAO

2. ARUN SAO

3. HARDEO SAO

4. BALO @ BALI SAO @ BALDEO SAO
ALL SONS OF MUNSHI SAO, RESIDENT OF DANKI IMALI,
P.S. ALAMGANJ, DISTT. PATNA – 7

————-APPELLANT
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ————RESPONDENT

————-

For the Appellants : Mr. Anjani Kumar Saran, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Binod Bihari Singh, A.P.P.

————-

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH

Anjana Prakash, J: The Appellants have been convicted under

Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous

imprisonment for two years by a Judgment dated 23.3.1996 passed

by the 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Patna, in Sessions Trial No.

263 of 1992.

2. The case of the prosecution according to PW-6

Chandra Bhushan Kumar is that on 14.12.1991 while he was going

to play in a certain Akhara, he saw the accused person variously

assaulting Manoj Kumar on account of which he was severely

injured and moved to the Hospital for treatment. Charge was

initially framed under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code but the

Appellants were acquitted of the same and convicted as mentioned

above.

2

3. During trial, the prosecution examined six

witnesses out of which PW-6 is the Informant who was declared

hostile along with PW-3 and PW-4. PW-7 is the formal witness who

proved the injury report of the injured. PW-2 is the injured whereas

PW-1 is his father.

4. No doubt, PW-2 has orally corroborated the

fact of his assault by the accused persons but it is difficult to sustain

the conviction of the Appellants only on the oral evidence in the

absence of the corroborative evidence of the Doctor.

5. In the result, the Appeal is allowed. The order

of conviction and sentence passed against the Appellants in

Sessions Trial No. 263 of 1992 by the 9th Additional Sessions

Judge, Patna, is hereby set aside.

6. The Appellants are discharged from the liability

of their bail bonds.

(Anjana Prakash, J.)

Patna High Court, Patna.

Dated, the 20th June, 2011
NAFR/S.ALI

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *