Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam on 13 May, 2024
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010094762024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/435/2024
DIGANTA BORA @ TUTU AND ANR
SON OF LATE DEBA BORA, R/O OFFICE LINE, TIPONG, UNDER LEKHAPANI
P.S., DIST. TINSUKIA
2: SRI RITU BORA
SON OF LATE DEBA BORA
R/O OFFICE LINE
TIPONG
UNDER LEKHAPANI P.S.
DIST. TINSUKI
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM,
REP BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B M CHOUDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
Linked Case : Crl.A./107/2008
DIGANTA BORA
-
2: TUTU BORA
Page No.# 2/4
3: RITU BORA
ALL ARE SONS OF LATE DEBA BORA
R/O OFFICE LINE
TIPONG
UNDER LEKHAPANI P.S.
DIST. TINSUKIA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
-
------------
Advocate for : MR. A K BHATTACHARYYA
Advocate for : MR.R KALITA appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY
ORDER
13.05.2024
1. Heard Mr. BM Choudhury, learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard
Mr. MP Goswami, learned Addl. PP, Assam.
2. This is an application for correction of the name of the appellant No. 2 in
the cause title of the judgment and order dated 22.04.2024 passed in Crl.
A. No. 107/2008 by this court and also for certain correction of
typographical errors in the paragraph No. 2 of the said judgment and
order.
3. Perused the pleadings made in the application.
4. So far relating to the correction of cause title, it is seen that the name of
the appellant No. 2 was typed in the appeal memo as " Sri Tutu Bora" and
name of the appellant No. 1 as "Sri Diganta Bora". However, said names
were also corrected as "Sri Diganta Bora @ Tutu" and "Sri Tapan Bora" by
Page No.# 3/4
hand with a signature of the learned counsel for the appellants. But, in the
CIS, such corrections were not incorporated and accordingly in the cause
title of the judgment and order, the uncorrected names were incorporated.
That being the position, the Registry is directed to correct the names of
the appellants in the CIS as per the names corrected and reflected in the
cause title of the appeal memo.
5. From the perusal of the records, it is also seen that at paragraph No. 2
there are some discrepancies as regards the description of the sentence
and relevant Sections of IPC in 2/3 places. The aforesaid corrections are
being typographical in nature and having no bearing on the decision
taken, said paragraph is corrected to the following effect:
"The present appeal is preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order dated
27.05.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) No. 1,
Tinsukia in Sessions Case No. 131(M)/2003 convicting the appellants
under Sections 326/34, 323/34 and 324/34 of the IPC and sentencing
them to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 2 years (each) with fine of
Rs. 3,000/- (each) in default Rigorous Imprisonment for 3 moths (each)
under Section 326/34 of the IPC and Rigorous Imprisonment for 1 year
(each) under Section 324/34 of the IPC and Rigorous Imprisonment for 3
months (each) under Section 323/34 of the IPC and all the sentences
were to run concurrently."
6. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed. It is provided that the
paragraph No. 2 of the said judgment and order shall be read as
aforesaid.
Page No.# 4/4
7. IA stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
