Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 98 (PAT)

Sushil Jha v. State of Bihar

2013-01-22

ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH

body2013
JUDGMENT (ORAL) Ashwani Kumar Singh, J. 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in pursuance of the leave granted by this Court on 28.8.2003 in S.L.A. No. 46 of 2002. The appeal is directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 13.6.2002 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Saharsa in Complaint Case No.1100 of 1999/Tr. No. 700 of 2002. 2. The appellant filed the aforesaid complaint on 22.12.1999 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. Saharsa alleging therein that on 21.12.1999 while he was going to sow wheat and when he reached near his bamboo orchard. he saw the accused persons cutting bamboos. Almost 15 bamboos were cut by them from his orchard and when the appellant raised protest the accused persons assaulted him with lathi, fists and slaps. The accused Bibhash Jha is alleged to have snatched the woolen shawl worth Rs.500/- and the accused Thakan Jha is alleged to have taken away the bag of fertilizer worth Rs. 440/- of the appellant. The appellant has further alleged in the complaint that the accused person had cut and damaged bamboos worth Rs. 1500/-. When the son of the appellant came to his rescue, the accused persons assaulted him too. 3. On perusal of the complaint. it appears that three persons namely Mohar Jha, Laddu Jha and Karam Lal Jha were cited as witnesses to the occurrence. The complainant was examined on solemn affirmation. After conducting inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the accused persons were summoned for trial. On 8.10.2011 the charges for the offences punishable under Sections 323 and 379, IPC were framed against the accused persons and the case was fixed for evidence. 4. In course of trial on behalf of the prosecution two witnesses were examined. The appellant who is the complainant of the case was examined as PW 2. Another witness namely Mohar Jha was examined as PW 1 in the case. However, Mohar Jha failed to appear for cross-examination in course of trial and as such, his evidence was discarded by the learned Judicial Magistrate. Thus in the present case, apart from the appellant (complainant). there is no other witness to support the prosecution case. The appellant has admitted in cross-examination that with respect to the same incident accused Thakkar Jha had instituted a case against him in Sonbarsa Police Station. Thus in the present case, apart from the appellant (complainant). there is no other witness to support the prosecution case. The appellant has admitted in cross-examination that with respect to the same incident accused Thakkar Jha had instituted a case against him in Sonbarsa Police Station. He has also stated that though there are several witnesses to the occurrence in the village but, he did not intend to examine them. He states that he had sustained serious injuries due to assault caused by lathi but. he did not go to any hospital for treatment. He failed to give the khesra No. and khata No. of the alleged place of occurrence. Taking into consideration the evidence on record the learned Magistrate after holding the trial acquitted the accused persons. 5. I find no reason to interfere with the verdict of the trial Court. As noted above apart from the appellant none was examined on behalf of the prosecution in course of trial. The allegations made in the complaint by the complainant remained uncorroborated by any other witness. The case of the complainant is that his son had come to rescue him while he was being assaulted and the accused persons assaulted him too. However, for the reasons best known to the complainant the appellant's son has not been made a witness in the case. There is no explanation as to why the witnesses cited in the complaint namely Laddu Jha and Karam Lal Jha were not examined in course of trial. There is no medical report to corroborate the allegation of assault. The sole testimony of the appellant is not fully reliable. 6. For the reasons stated and discussions made hereinabove. I do not find any merit in the present appeal. It is dismissed accordingly. Appeal dismissed.