Jharkhand HC Dismisses Petition Against the Conviction and Order of Sentence

- Advertisement -

A Criminal Appeal was filed against the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.10.2013 passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Deoghar. The Appeal was dismissed by Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary with no interference called for in the direction issued by the learned courts below.

Brief Facts

Mintu Verma who is the informant in this case filed a report to the Officer-in-charge, Sarwan P.S., District- Deoghar that on 04.03.2004 at around 01:30 P.M., both the parents of the informants had gone to their nearby agriculture field when his cousin Bhabhi namely, Guriya Devi and Rambha Devi, entered his house and started abusing him which caused a huge argument between the informant and his cousins. 

Jitendra Verma, who is the uncle of the informant then enters into the house and grabs the informant by his hair and thrashes him to the ground, assaults him with fists and slaps due to which blood started oozing out of his mouth which resulted in injuries on the mouth and back. After hearing the loud noise coming from the house the informants’ father rushed inside and took him to the police station to give a written report on the incident. Based on the written report, the case was registered as Sarwan P.S. Case No. 33/2004 under Sections 448, 341, 323, 379, 427, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners.

Submissions of the Petitioner

- Advertisement -

Learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary presented that the impeached judgment passed by the lower court is unreasonable because the evidence wasn’t discussed properly. It was also presented that the offense under section 448 of the Indian Penal Code is invalid as there was no house trespassing since the parties live in the same house. It was also presented that the petitioners were blood relatives of the informant which makes the event within the family. 

He further presents that even so the allegation against Jitendra Verma that he threw the informant on the ground leading to blood oozing out, the injury report was not exhibited. The doctors and the investigating officers of the case were not examined. Otherwise, also due to the long gap, there is no reason to provide bond under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act and has relied on the (2012) 4 Eastern Indian Criminal Cases 48 (Patna) judgment passed by the Hon’ble Patna High Court.

Submissions by the Respondent

On the other hand, Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the Opposite Party-State Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha submitted that the arguments of the petitioners that there is no offence under section 448 of the Indian Penal Code are not correct. There was evidence provided to the lower court that even though the informant and the petitioner are blood-related they do not live together even though their courtyard as well and common. 

- Advertisement -

 It was also submitted that merely because the doctors were not examined and the injury report wasn’t presented it does not make it invalid. The lower court has already considered the version of the parents of the informant where they saw the blood and injury and the informant who pointed out his injury which is still considered as an offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner.

 He also submitted that non-examination of the I.O. is not fatal to the case and has not caused any injustice to the petitioners. The lower court has considered and analyzed all the evidence on record and the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the evidence on record not being analyzed properly is incorrect. Merely because many years have passed from the direction to execute the bond, it cannot be considered as a ground for exempting the petitioners from executing the bond as given by the learned trial court.

Verdict of the Court

The court found that there is no need for interference to the judgment passed by the lower court and affirmed by the learned appellate court, is upheld and the criminal revision petition is hereby dismissed. 

- Advertisement -

Click here to view the full judgment 


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

About the Author

- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -spot_img