Orissa High Court
Nabaghana Rana; vs State Of Orissa on 21 June, 2024
Author: D.Dash
Bench: D.Dash
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRA No.200 of 2001
In the matter of an Appeal under Section 374 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 and from the judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 30.08.2001 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Boudh, in S.T No.37 of 2000 (S.T.77 of
2000D.C.).
----
Nabaghana Rana; .... Appellants
Sadhu Rana
-versus-
State of Orissa .... Respondent
Appeared in this case by Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical Mode):
For Appellant - Mr.D. P. Dhal,
Advocate
For Respondent - Mr. P. K. Mohanty,
Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM
MR. JUSTICE D.DASH
Date of Hearing :20.05.2024 : Date of Judgment : 21.06.2024
D.Dash,J. The Appellants, by filing this Appeal, have
assailed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence
30.08.2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Boudh, in S.T No.37 of 2000 (S.T.77 of 2000 D.C.), arising out of
G.R Case No.268 of 1996, corresponding to Kantamala P.S. Case
No.45 of 1996 of the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial
Magistrate, Boudh.
The Appellants with others faced the trial being charged for
commission of offence under section 148/307 read with section
149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'the IPC').
The Trial Court upon examination of the evidence of the
prosecution witnesses as also the documents admitted in
evidence and upon scrutiny of the same, has acquitted these
accused persons as also the others of the charge under section
148/307/149 of the IPC. However, with the available evidence on
record, the Trial Court has held these accused persons guilty of
commission of offence under section 324 of the IPC and
accordingly, they have been convicted thereunder. The
Appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for one year for the said offence
2. Learned counsel for the Appellants (accused persons) from
the beginning instead of attacking the finding of guilt as against
the accused persons as has been returned by the Trial Court for
commission of offence under section 324 of the IPC, confined his
submission only on the question of sentence. According to him,
these accused persons, who hail from rural background have
now attained 67 and 62 years of age and they too have
undergone the mental agony of the criminal trial for about 28
years by now when they have also remained in custody for three
months.
In view of all these above, when there comes no report that
the accused persons are having any criminal antecedent nor it is
said that they have indulged in any criminal activity during all
these period, it was urged that the sentence of imprisonment for
the period undergone for the said offence under section 324 of the
IPC at this distance of time would be in the interest of justice and
that would meet the ends of justice too.
3. Learned Counsel for the Respondent-State submitted that
the sentence imposed by the Trial Court commensurate the
offence.
4. Keeping in view the submissions made, I have carefully
read the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence
which have been impugned in this Appeal. I have also gone
through the depositions of P.W.1 to P.W.9 as also the documents
which have been admitted in evidence and marked Ext.1 to
Ext.7/1.
The accused persons as it appears from the record have
been acquitted of the major charge and each has been
individually held liable for committing the offence under section
324 of the IPC. The incident had happened on account of land
dispute and more particularly scramble over the possession in
view of the rival claim. The appellants have now reached the age
of 67 & 62 when. They hail from rural background and judicial
notice of the fact can be taken that those people exhibits
unexpected behaviour in very silly matters and their temper
usually run high and response often become abnormal and totally
unexpected at times. There is no report that the accused persons have
any criminal antecedent. Record reveals that they have remained in
custody from 31.07.1996 till 19.10.1996. These accused persons have
undergone the mental agony of criminal trial for more than 27 years.
5. Taking into account all these above factors at this distance
of time, this Court is of the considered view that for the
commission of the offence under section 324 of the IPC, if the
accused persons are sentenced to the imprisonment for the
period already undergone, that would serve and meet the ends of
justice.
6. In the result, the Appeal is allowed in part with the
modification of the sentence to the extent as indicated above.
(D. Dash),
Judge.
Gitanjali
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK
Date: 27-Jun-2024 12:28:33
