Jharkhand High Court
Chutari Mian Son Of Giro Mian vs The State Of Jharkhand on 28 October, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.A(SJ) No.1088 of 2006
1. Chutari Mian Son of Giro Mian
2. Maina Mian Son of Late Dukhi Mian
3. Giro Mian Son of Late Dukhi Mian
4. Md. Ishak Mian Son of Giro Mian
All Resident of Village Shamsingh Nawadih P.S. Jamua, District -
Giridih
... Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Respondent
------
For the Appellant : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv.
For the State : Mr. V.S. Sahay, Addl. P.P.
------
PRESENT
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
JUDGMENT
Dated- 28.10.2024
By Court:- Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing
for the appellants as well as Mr. V.S. Sahay, learned A.P.P.
appearing for the State.
2. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellants
challenging the judgment and order of conviction and
sentence dated 12.07.2006 passed by Additional District and
Sessions Judge, F.T.C. I, Giridih in Sessions Trial Case No.35
of 2001 whereby and whereunder appellants were sentenced
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the
offence punishable under Section 148 of the Indian Penal
Code, rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence
punishable under Section 323 of the I.P.C., rigorous
imprisonment for two years for the offence punishable under
Section 324/34 of the I.P.C. and rigorous imprisonment for
three years for the offence punishable under Section 325/34
of the I.P.C.
3. The prosecution case is based on written report by one
Wazir Mian (informant) stating inter alia that on 07.06.1999 at
about 6:30 a.m., while informant and his family were
ploughing a field, some arguments took place between him
and Chutari Mian. Later, Chutari Mian returned along with
four other persons who were armed with weapons and
attacked informant and his family members. Chutari struck
informant and his son with a rod causing severe injuries,
while other accused persons assaulted informant's family
members with stick. The incident was witnessed by
neighbours, who intervened.
4. On the basis of above written report of the informant,
Jamua P.S. Case No.68 of 1999 was registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 324, 325, 307 of the
Indian Penal Code.
5. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was
submitted against the appellants for the aforesaid offences
and accordingly, cognizance was taken and subsequently, the
case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Charges were
framed against the accused persons which were read over
and explained to them to which they did not plead guilty and
claimed to be tried.
6. In the course of trial, altogether twelve witnesses were
examined by the prosecution and following documentary
evidence were also adduced:
Exhibit 1 : Written application
Exhibit 2, 2/1 & 2/2 : Injury reports issued by P.W.-7
Exhibit 3, 3/1, 3/2, 3/3 & 3/4: Injury reports issued by Dr.
Ramayan Ram at P.H.C. Jamua
Exhibit 4, 4/1, 4/2 and 4/3 : Inspection report of the injured
by I.O. (P.W.-12)
Exhibit 5 : First Information Report
7. After conclusion of trial, the appellants were held guilty
for the aforesaid offences and sentenced as stated above
which has been assailed in this appeal.
Cr.A(SJ) No.1088 of 2006 Page | 3
8. Learned counsel for the appellants without touching the
merits of the judgment has confined himself to the point of
non-extension of benefit of provisions of Section 4 of the
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to the appellants to which
they deserve. The plea was raised before the learned Trial
Court but without specifying/recording any special reasons,
the appellants have been denied the aforesaid benefit only on
account of seriousness of the offence.
9. It is further submitted that the occurrence is of the year
1999 and more than two decades have been lapsed.
Admittedly, the occurrence took place in a sudden manner
due to land dispute and there were exchange of assault from
both parties. The appellants have been held guilty for the
offences under Sections 323, 324 and 325 r.w. Section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code. Maximum sentence is awarded to the
extent of R.I. of three years for the offence under Section 325
r.w. Section 34 of the I.P.C. It is appellants' first offence and
they have never been convicted for any other offence at all.
This fact was also pleaded before the learned Trial Court but
has not been taken into consideration without recording any
special reasons as required under law. Hence, the appellants
deserve the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders
Act, 1958.
10. To the above extent of argument, learned A.P.P.
appearing for the State has raised no objection. However, he
has defended the impugned judgment and order on merits.
11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
nature of offence alleged to have been committed by
appellants, their age, character and antecedents, it appears
expedient in the interest of justice to extend the benefit of
Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to the
appellants instead of awarding substantive sentence of
imprisonment as awarded by the learned Trial Court.
Therefore, this appeal is dismissed on merits with
modification in sentence to the extent mentioned above. The
appellants are directed to appear before the concerned trial
court within two months from the date of this judgment. The
learned trial court shall call upon a report from District
Probation Officer and instead of undergoing substantive
sentence of imprisonment release the appellants upon
furnishing the bond of Rs.10,000/- with one surety to
maintain peace and be of good behaviour for a period of one
Cr.A(SJ) No.1088 of 2006 Page | 5
year from the date of furnishing bond to the satisfaction of
concerned trial court. In case of violation of the terms and
conditions of the bond, the appellants shall be called upon by
the concerned trial court to appear and receive the sentences
awarded to them.
12. Let a copy of this judgment along with Trial Court
record be sent back to the concerned Trial Court for
information and needful.
13. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Sachin
