Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 249 (JHR)

Baldeo Yadav v. State of Jharkhand

2010-02-17

D.K.SINHA

body2010
Order This Criminal Revision is directed against the order impugned dated 22.7.2009 passed by the Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in Cr. Appeal No. 46 of 2009 by which the appeal filed by the petitioners against order dated 28.2.2009 passed bf the SDM, Ramgarh in M. Case No. 70 of 2008 was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed. 2. The petitioners were called upon to execute bond of Rs. 5,000/- with two sureties of like amount each separately for maintaining peace and to be of good behaviour for a period of one year in a proceeding under Section 107 Cr.P.C. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners assailed the order impugned recorded by the Sessions. Judge that the appeal was dismissed without discussing the evidence and materials hence it cannot be sustained under law which speaks:- "I find that the proceeding under Section 107 of the Cr.P .C. was initiated on 29.2.~008 and final order has been passed on 28.2.2009 after examination of witnesses of both the sides. The impugned order is well discussed and reasoned. Hence in my view, the same requires no interference, and there is no illegality in the impugned order. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed." 4. I find that the aforesaid finding and observation made by the learned Sessions Judge in Cr: Appeal is unsustainable. What the Sessions Judge was required to do in Cr. Appeal was to deal with at least the evidence of the material witnesses recorded in a proceeding under Section 107 Cr.P .C. to substantiate. his finding, I find that the submission that has been advanced on behalf of the petitioners was that the evidence adduced on their behalf was not dealt with in its right perspective and the proceeding was decided by the learned SDM, Ramgarh one sided. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Criminal Revision is allowed by setting aside the order impugned dated 22.7.2009 recorded by the Sessions Judge in Cr. Appeal No.46 of 2009, however, with the direction to the Sessions Judge to pass a reasoned order on the basis of the materials available on the record. .