Jharkhand High Court
Ram Dayal Oraon vs The State Of Jharkhand on 10 February, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 1492 of 2015
---------
Ram Dayal Oraon ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite Party
---------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
---------
For the Petitioner : Mrs. Amrita Banerjee, Amicus Curiae
For the State : Mr. Sunil Kr. Dubey, A.P.P.
---------
10/10.02.2023
Heard the parties.
This application is being disposed of at the stage of Admission
itself.
This criminal revision application is directed against the judgment
dated 19.12.2014, passed by Sri Vishnu Kant Sahay, learned Sessions
Judge, Lohardaga in Cr. Appeal No.09/2012, whereby and wherein the
learned Sessions Judge, Lohardaga affirmed the judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 11.01.2012, passed by Sri Arbind Kumar,
learned S.D.J.M., Lohardaga, in connection with Lohardaga P.S. Case No.
62/2003, corresponding to G.R. Case No.195/2003, holding the petitioner,
Ram Dayal Oraon guilty of offence under Section 414 of the Indian Penal
Code and thereby sentencing him to undergo R.I. for two years. The
Appellate Court modified the sentenced passed by the learned Trial Court
and reduced the same for R.I. for one year.
The prosecution case was instituted on the basis of fardbeyan of the
informant namely Sanjay Kumar, Police officer posted at Lohardaga
police station alleging therein, that on 10.06.2003 a raid was conducted in
a semi constructed house near Shanti Ashram. After seeing the police
party, three persons, who were present there tried to escape. One person
namely Maya Oraon was apprehended and on search, stolen motorcycle
was recovered from the said premises. Apprehended accused Maya Oraon
confessed that this petitioner was also present there and he managed to
escape.
In order to prove its case, prosecution had adduced both and oral
documentary evidences.
On the basis of evidence available on the record, both the learned
Trial Court as well as the learned Appellate Court have come to
concurrent findings regarding the guilt of the petitioner.
Perused the record, it appears that all the prosecution witnesses
have supported the fact that an under construction house was raided and
from there stolen motorcycle was recovered. They have also supported the
fact that the accused Maya Oraon was apprehended from there. None of
the witnesses have identified this petitioner the person who had escaped
from the place of occurrence at the time of raid.
Perused the seizure list, which is Exhibit-1. From perusal of the
same, it appears that a motorcycle was recovered from a semi constructed
house belonging to Sukar Lohra. It has been mentioned that Petitioner and
accused Maya Oraon were using the premises. This fact appears to have
been mentioned on the basis of confession of accused Maya Oraon.
Prosecution has not brought any cogent evidence to show that petitioner
was using the premises from where the stolen motor cycle was recovered.
Apart from confession of Maya Oraon, there is no other material
against the petitioner on record.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the
opinion that both the learned Trial Court as well as the learned Appellate
Court have come to an erroneous findings regarding the guilt of the
petitioner.
The judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
11.01.2012, passed by Sri Arbind Kumar, learned S.D.J.M., Lohardaga, in
connection with Lohardaga P.S. Case No. 62/2003, corresponding to G.R.
Case No.195/2003 is hereby set aside.
This Criminal Revision Application is party allowed.
Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.
(Ambuj Nath, J.)
Jay/-
