Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 244 (JHR)

Lalsahay Uraon v. State of Jharkhand

2010-02-16

PRADEEP KUMAR

body2010
JUDGMENT (1) SINCE, this is a jail appeal and the earlier lawyer appointed by the Court has not came today due to some death in his family, hence, on the request of the Court, Shri Kaushal Agarwal argued the case as Amicus Curie. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and learned counsel for the State. (2) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 12-10-2001 and order of sentence dated 15-10-2001 passed by Sri Radha Govind Singh Nagesh, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Latehar in Sessions Trial Case No. 280 of 1998, by which judgment, he found the appellant guilty for the offence under Sections 149, 324, and 353 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each. He also found him guilty under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years. He also found him guilty under Section 436 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years. However, all the sentences were directed to run concurrently. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant arguing as amicus curie that except the evidence of P.W. 4, Jaswant Singh, the informant, there is no evidence against the appellant and the evidence of the informant has totally been contradicted by the evidence of P.W. 1, Hira Lal Uraon, who stated that the appellant, Lalsahay Uraon is his neighbour and resident of his village and he has no connection with the terrorists and the allegation made by the informant, in that view of the matter, is not correct and the trial Court has committed an error of law in convicting the appellant. (3) ON the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and supported the prosecution case and submitted that from the evidences of P.W. 1, Hiralal Uraon, P.W. 4, Jaswant Singh and from the evidence of P.W. 5, Dr. Surendra Singh, it is clear that the appellant was one of the terrorists, who put fire in his house causing injury on the person of the informant, and as such, he has rightly been convicted. Surendra Singh, it is clear that the appellant was one of the terrorists, who put fire in his house causing injury on the person of the informant, and as such, he has rightly been convicted. (4) AFTER hearing both the parties and after going through the evidences on record, it appears that the prosecution case was started on the basis of fardbeyan given by P.W. 4, Jaswant Singh on 26/9/1997 at 10.20 a.m. stating therein that in the morning at about 7.30 a.m., when he left his house in Latehar and after crossing the Tubaid river, when he was washing his feet, then suddenly, 30-35 people armed with gun came there and started firing upon him and he ran away from the place of occurrence. While, running away, he has received injury on his shoulder. Then, he entered the house of Hiralal Uraon, which was just in the beginning of his village. Then the terrorists cardoned the house and asked him to come out from the house, then they put the house on fire. When the terrorist cardoned the house, police also reached there and started firing upon the terrorists. He saw the accused, Lalsahay Uraon putting fire in the house. He also saw Israkil Mian with the terrorists. Subsequently, due to police firing, they ran away from the village. On the basis of said F.I.R., police registered a case for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 326, 307 and 436 of the Indian Penal Code and after investigation submitted charge-sheet in the case. (5) SINCE, the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Session, the learned C.J.M., after taking cognizance committed the same to the Court of Session and lastly learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Latehar tried the case and passed the judgment as aforesaid. (6) IT appears that in course of trial, the prosecution has examined altogether six witnesses. P.W. 1 is Hiralal Uraon. P.W. 2 is Binu Uraon. P.W. 3 is Rameshwar Uraon. P.W. 4 is Jaswant Singh (Yashwant Singh), who is the informant. P.W. 5 is Dr. Surendra Singh, who has examined the informant. P.W. 6 is Chitranjan Pandey, the formal witness, who proved the signature of the informant on the fardbeyan. It is important to note that the I.O. was not examined in the case. P.W. 3 is Rameshwar Uraon. P.W. 4 is Jaswant Singh (Yashwant Singh), who is the informant. P.W. 5 is Dr. Surendra Singh, who has examined the informant. P.W. 6 is Chitranjan Pandey, the formal witness, who proved the signature of the informant on the fardbeyan. It is important to note that the I.O. was not examined in the case. It appears that the informant, P.W. 4, Jaswant Singh has fully supported his case as given in fardbeyan and stated that on 26-9-1997, when he was going to Latehar to his village Mangra and after he crossed the Tubaid river and when he was washing his feet, then suddenly 30-35 terrorists came armed with gun and started firing upon him. He received injury on his shoulder. Then, he crossed back Tubaid river and after reaching the village entered the house of P.W. 1, Hiralal Uraon and closed the door from inside. Then, the terrorists cardoned the house and asked him to come out from the house, then they put the house on fire. He saw the accused Lalsahay Uraon putting fire in the house. Then, he opened the roof by 'Tangi' and saved himself. He had also identified Israkil Mian among the terrorists. When, police also reached there and started firing upon the terrorists, then they ran away towards north. He has proved his signature on the fardbeyan as Ext. 1 and identified the signature of Hiralal Uraon as Ext. 1/1. In his cross-examination, he stated that the house of Hiralal is at a distance of 500 metres from the river. He had received injury while crossing the river near a 'Jhari'. The terrorists were firing from the back and when he entered into the house of Hiralal and closed the door from inside, he saw that the wife of Hiralal was sitting in the 'Angan' and his daughter was cleaning utensils and Hiralal has gone to the field. The terrorists could not break the door, and from inside, he saw that subsequently the villagers Hiralal, the owner of the house along with villagers namely Mangra Uraon, Late Uraon, Matho Uraon, Ramdeo Bhagat and others also came there. The villagers have nothing in their hands nor they were participating in the acts of terrorists and due to police firing they ran away. The villagers have nothing in their hands nor they were participating in the acts of terrorists and due to police firing they ran away. (7) HOWEVER, the evidence of the informant, P.W. 4, Jashwant Singh has totally been contradicted by the evidence of P.W. 1, Hiralal Uraon, who stated that on the date of occurrence, he was working in the field near the house and when the terrorists were chasing Jaswant Singh, who had blood stain on his cloth, he entered his house and closed the house from inside. The terrorists were 30- 35 in numbers and they were putting fire on the southern side of his house to force Jashwant Singh to come out from the house. He stated that the villager Ramgarwa Uraon alias Lalsahay Uraon was also present there, but he had nothing in his hand. He was not putting fire to the house. In his cross-examination, he stated that his house was just by the side of the house of Lalsahay Uraon, and since, on the date of occurrence, it was Jitiya festival, Lalsahay Uraon was drunk and the terrorists brought him outside the house and assaulted him. He had nothing to do with the terrorists. (8) OTHER witnesses namely P.W. 2, Binu Uraon and P.W. 3, Rameshwar Uraon have turned hostile and they have not supported the prosecution case. Thus, two witnesses, P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 were named by the informant P.W. 4, but they have not supported the prosecution case. The doctor has only proved the injury on the shoulder of the informant. No doubt that the terrorists fired upon him when crossing the river and he could not identify any of the terrorists, in that view of the matter, there is no evidence to hold the appellant, Lalsahay Uraon guilty for any of the offence charged. Since, P.W. 1, Hiralal Uraon, in whose house, the informant was taking shelter and who was present there, has stated that he was not among the terrorists rather he stated that he was his neighbour, residing in the house just beside his house and he was drunk due to Jitiya festival and he was himself assaulted. Thus, the charges of the appellant has not been proved beyond reasonable doubts. Thus, the charges of the appellant has not been proved beyond reasonable doubts. (9) IN the result, in my opinion, the appellant is acquitted from the charges levelled against him and the judgment of conviction dated 12.10.2001 and order of sentence dated 15.10.2001 passed by Sri Radha Govind Singh Nagesh, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Latehar in Sessions Trial Case No. 280 of 1998 is set aside. (10) IF the appellant is in jail custody, he is directed to be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is allowed. Appeal allowed.