Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 426 (JHR)

Dadu Munda v. State Of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)

2006-04-21

DHANANJAY PRASAD SINGH

body2006
JUDGMENT D.P. Singh, J. 1. The sole appellant Dadu Munda has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction dated 19.5.2000 passed by 5th A.J.C. Ranchi in S.T. No. 208 of 1998 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 412of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve R.I. for seven years. 2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that in the night of 1 st September 1997 the informant Chandrama Singh has proceeded from Gumla to Ranchi in Maruti Van bearing Registration No. BR-14-C-5321 along with three others. As further stated at about 10 p.m. after traveling 6-7 K.M. between Bero Police Station, they found the road was blocked with boulders and two vehicles were standing there. The informant tried to turn back with the vehicle when all of sudden 8-10 criminals surrounded the Page 1401 vehicle and broke upon the glasses of the vehicle. Thereafter bombs were thrown causing splinter injury to the passengers of the Maruti Van. Thereafter criminals looted cash, wrist watch and some documents along with hand bag from the passengers. The informant and other passengers went to Bharno hospital and received first aid. The matter was reported to Bharno police at 12.30 in the night at primary health centre, Bharno. The police accordingly registered a case bearing Bero P.S. Case No. 46 of 1997 under Section 395,397 of the Indian Penal Code against un known. The police investigated the case and finally submitted charge sheet against the appellant under Section 395,397 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code as a blank cheque was recovered from the house of the appellant said to be looted during this occurrence and as the said cheque belong to Bihar State Food and Civil Supply Corporation and the informant Chandrama Singh was Manager of Bihar State Food and Civil Supply Corporation, Gumla. 3. The case of the appellant was committed to the court of sessions for trial. The appellant was charged for the offences on 17.3.1998 to which he pleaded not quilty. The trial court after examining witnesses and recording statement of the appellant has found and held him guilty for the offences under Section 412 of the Indian Penal Code only after acquitting him for the charges under Section 395,397 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. The appellant was charged for the offences on 17.3.1998 to which he pleaded not quilty. The trial court after examining witnesses and recording statement of the appellant has found and held him guilty for the offences under Section 412 of the Indian Penal Code only after acquitting him for the charges under Section 395,397 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. This appeal has been preferred on the grounds that the appellant was neither named in the FIR nor there is any positive evidence that the said blank cheques were recovered from his conscious possession. According to this memo of appeal the trial court has convicted the appellant on surmises and conjectures. It is also asserted that in absence of his conviction under Section 395/397 of the Indian Penal Code the conviction under Section 412 of the Indian Penal Code is not maintainable. It is also pointed out that the cheque books said to be recovered from his house did not tally with the alleged looted cheque books. According to the learned Counsel for the appellant he was not identified by any of the eyewitnesses and the recovery of the cheque books become doubtful as the seizure list witnesses P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 had become hostile. Therefore the appellant who has already remained in custody from 3.1.1997 till 4.9.2000 may be acquitted of the charges. 5. Learned APP appearing for the State opposed this contention on the ground that the appellant was found in possession of a cheque books belonging to the informant looted during the alleged occurrence on 1.9.1997 and he could not explain under what circumstances the cheque books signed by the Accounts Officer of the Bihar State Food and Civil Supply Corporation was recovered from his possession. 5. The learned Counsel for the appellant drew my attention towards the evidence of P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 both Choukidars of Bero Police Station and they have signed over the seizure list as directed by the I.O. And on being declared hostile they denied that the cheque books were recovered in their presence. P.W. 1 Gajanand Jhunjhunwala, P.W. 4 Subhash Chandra Choubey, P.W. 5 Anil Kumar Srivastava, P.W. 7, Chandrama Singh who was injured during the offences have admitted that they could not identify any of the miscreants. P.W. 1 Gajanand Jhunjhunwala, P.W. 4 Subhash Chandra Choubey, P.W. 5 Anil Kumar Srivastava, P.W. 7, Chandrama Singh who was injured during the offences have admitted that they could not identify any of the miscreants. P.W. 6 is the I.O. of this case, according to him during investigation he raided the house of the appellant in the morning of 23.9.1997 and recovered one bomb as well as one blank cheque in presence of witnesses which bore the signature of Assistant Account District Manager, Bihar State Food Page 1402 and Civil Supply Corporation. He further stated during cross-examination that the appellant was arrested on 6th October 1997 as he has fled away during the raid. The learned Counsel for the appellant pointed out that it shows the alleged recovery of cheque was made in absence of the appellant, therefore he can not be held responsible for the recovery of the cheque and further convicted for possessing looted article under Section 412 of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly it is submitted that in absence of any positive evidence that the appellant was in conscious possession of looted article, one single cheque, he may be acquitted of the charges. 6. I have gone through the evidences available in the case records and the impugned judgment by which the learned lower court has relied upon the recovery of the blank cheque from the house of this appellant and found him guilty of possession of a stolen article. Prosecution story that the blank cheque was recovered from the house of this appellant on 23.9.1997 in presence of witnesses become doubtful when seizure list witnesses P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 has turned hostile. It is also found that the recovery of the cheque was not from the conscious possession of the appellant. In such view of the fact when the appellant was acquitted of the main charges, I find that his conviction under Section 412 of the Indian Penal Code is not maintainable. 7. Having regards to the above mentioned facts, I find that this appeal has got merit, accordingly this appeal deserves to be allowed and is hereby allowed. The judgment of conviction of the appellant is hereby set aside. The appellant is further released from the liabilities of his bail bond. 8. Let a copy of this judgment along with original case record be transmitted to the concerned lower court for information and needful.