Jharkhand High Court
Ganesh Mondal vs The State Of Jharkhand on 28 January, 2025
Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 405 of 2006
[Against the Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence dated
23.03.2006, passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge,
Jamtara in Sessions Case No. 198 of 2000 / 18 of 2004 ]
1. Ganesh Mondal, Son of Late Adhir Mondal.
2. Nimai Mondal, Son of Late Dhananjay Mondal.
3. Basudev Mondal, Son of Late Shri Madan Mondal.
4. Santu Mondal, Son of Late Dhananjoy Mondal.
All resident of Village - Dhemdhra, P.S. -
Jamtara, District - Jamtara.
... ... Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Respondent
.....
For the Appellant : Mrs. Vani Kumari, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P.
.....
P R E S E N T
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
JUDGMENT
C.A.V. on 18.11.2024 Pronounced on 28.01.2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present criminal appeal is directed against the
judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
23.03.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-II, Jamtara in Sessions Case No. 198/2000
and Sessions Case No. 18/2004 (arising out of
Jamtara P.S. Case No. 196 of 1998), whereby and
whereunder the appellants have been held guilty and
sentenced for the offence under Sections 147, 323,
341, 353, 333, 427, 379 / 511 of the I.P.C.
FACTUAL MATRIX
3. The factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that
one Jagat Narayan Singh, S.I. Jamtara Police Station
Page 1 of 14
Camp Dhandhara lodged a written report on
19.10.1998 stating inter alia that he has received
telephonic information from Electrical Supply Sub-
Station, Jamtara that some criminals are likely to cut
and steal wire of Chitra Mines. In order to verify the
matter, the informant along with armed forced
namely, Hawaldar Ramashrya Singh, Constable No.
290 (P.W.-2), Thakur Dayal Yadav (P.W.-7), Constable
No. 655, Sadan Singh (P.W.-1) and private driver of
Jeep No. WMC-8702 namely, Biseswar Sah (P.W.-6)
proceeded towards the spot. It is further alleged that
when police force reached near Dhandhara village,
they saw a man moving under suspicious
circumstances. Therefore, S.I. Jagat Narayan Singh
asked him as to why he is moving here at odd time i.e.
23 hours in night then the person told his name as
Ganesh Mondal @ Gansa and reply in blunt manner
therein to police personnel to mind their own
business and also started arguing with police party,
thereafter proceeded towards Dhandhara road. The
informant along with police party went towards road
near the police jeep, where 8-10 persons surrounded
the police party and started abusing and assaulted
the informant with fist and slaps and also tried to
snatch the riffle. It is further alleged that in the
Page 2 of 14
meantime, Ganesh Mondal @ Gansa and Nimai
Mondal struck lathi on Constable Thakur Dayal
Yadav and other Constables, resulting in grievous
injuries to Thakur Dayal Yadav. It is further alleged
that when the informant tried to pacify the accused
persons, they abused the informant, torn his uniform
and tried to snatch away his revolver. It is further
alleged that with a view to meet out situation, the
driver of the jeep was directed to give telephonic
message to police station from Electricity Department
and then Officer-in-Charge Satish Chander Das and
other police force came to the place of occurrence,
then accused persons fled away.
4. On the basis of written report of informant (Exhibit-1),
formal FIR was registered and after investigation of
the case, charge sheet was submitted against the
aforesaid appellants for the aforesaid offences. The
case was committed to the court of Sessions. Charges
were read over and explained to the accused persons
and upon denial the trial commenced.
5. In course of trial, altogether seven witnesses have
been examined by the prosecution. Apart from oral
testimony of the witnesses, following documentary
evidences have been brought on record:-
Exhibit-1 : Written Report.
Page 3 of 14
Exhibit-1/1 : Endorsement on written report for
registration of case.
Exhibit-2 : Signature of the then Officer-in-Charge.
Exhibit-3 : Injury slip of Thakur Dayal Yadav.
Exhibit-4 : Injury Report of Thakur Dayal Yadav.
6. The case of defence is denial from occurrence and
false implication. However, no oral and documentary
evidence has been adduced by the defence.
7. Learned counsel for the appellants has vehemently
argued that the learned trial court has miserably
failed to take into notice the material contradictions
and infirmities appearing in the testimony of the
witnesses. The main injured witness Thakur Dayal
Yadav has completely failed to identify his assailant
and the nature of injury sustained by him is
dislocation on the shoulder, which is found to be
grievous in nature without any x-ray report. Moreover,
there was no surface injury, although the Doctor, who
has examined him, claims that if assault is given on
the above injury there must be surface injury. Other
injury is simple in nature and it is also opined by the
Doctor that the above injuries may be caused due to
fall. The driver of the police jeep (P.W.-6) has been
declared hostile by the prosecution, who has
specifically stated that he was standing on the road
Page 4 of 14
with the jeep and not gone to the place of occurrence.
It is further submitted that the very genesis of the
case is that the accused persons were assembled for
committing theft of wire from Electricity Department,
but neither such case was registered against the
appellants nor it is proved that the appellants were
indulged in committing theft of electricity wire. It is
also not explained by prosecution as to why and
under what circumstances, road was blocked by the
villagers. The learned trial court has also failed to
consider that there is no circumstance in the entire
prosecution story invoking the offence under Sections
353 and 333 of the I.P.C. Similarly, no common object
of the appellants has been described in the F.I.R. or in
the evidence of the witnesses in prosecution of which,
they have attacked upon the police personnel. Most of
the witnesses have clearly stated that due to darkness
of night, they have not identified any miscreants
including the sole injured Constable Thakur Dayal
Yadav. It is also admitted by the witnesses that none
of the accused persons were previously acquainted
with the police personnel and they were not arrested
from the spot on the same day of the occurrence.
Therefore, the basis of implication of the appellants in
this case is absolutely on statement of police spy. The
Page 5 of 14
appellants are reputed local villagers and have been
falsely implicated in this case and the learned trial
court without properly appreciating the evidence on
record has held the appellants guilty and accordingly
sentenced them, which is absolutely illegal and liable
to be set aside.
8. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the
contentions raised on behalf of learned counsel for the
appellants and has submitted that the trial court has
very wisely and aptly examined all the aspect of the
case and materials available on the record and arrived
at right conclusion about guilt of the appellants and
sentenced them according to law. There is no reason
to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of
conviction and sentence of the appellants. Thus, the
appeal is devoid of merit and fit to be dismissed.
9. I have gone through the record of the case along with
the impugned judgment and order passed by the
learned trial court in the light of contentions raised on
behalf of both side.
10. First of all, a brief resume of oral testimony of
witnesses is required to be discussed for better
appreciation of the case.
P.W.-1 : Sadan Singh (Constable No. 655) was
member of Raiding Party. According to his evidence,
Page 6 of 14
in the month of October in the night patrolling, he
along with Sub-Inspector and other police personnel
proceeded for raiding and preventing electric wire
theft which was frequent in the locality and went
towards electric office near Jamtara-Dumka Road,
then saw a person was flashing torch. The police
party moved the jeep towards that person and
intervened him asking as to why he is moving in the
night. Some other persons namely, Nimai Mondal,
Santu Mondal were also present there, who were
armed with lathi and started assaulting to police party
and torn the uniform of police Sub-Inspector.
Constable Thakur Dayal Yadav was also assaulted by
lathi. Thereafter, Officer-in-Charge of the police
station and Dy. S.P. arrived at the place of occurrence
and the accused persons fled away.
In his cross-examination, it was noticed that
this witness has written names of accused persons on
his palm namely, Sant, Ganesh and Nimai, but he has
disclosed the name of Nimai Mondal and Kartik
Mondal, who were involved in the incident. This
witness has not stated the name of any accused
persons while his statement was recorded by the I.O.
11. P.W.-2 Hawaldar Ramashrya Singh. He is also
member of the raiding party. According to his
evidence, they had gone for detecting the criminals
Page 7 of 14
involved in electric wire theft from electricity office and
in the night, at about 11 AM went to the place of
occurrence, where one person was found wondering
who disclosed his name as Ganesh @ Gansha and
meanwhile, 10-12 persons assembled. They were
taking name of other miscreants namely, Nimai,
Santu, who assaulted to Constable Thakur Dayal
Yadav and the S.I. Jagat Narayan by fist and fat.
Thereafter, information was given at police station and
upon arrival of Officer-in-Charge, the accused persons
fled away. He has claimed to identify Nimai, Ganesh
and Santu. He has failed to re-collect as to whether he
has disclosed the names of accused persons in his
statement recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. or
not. He also admits that the occurrence took place just
one day prior to the Diwali festival, but he cannot tell,
it was dark night or moon night. He was not
acquainted with the accused persons prior to incident
and after the incident, he has never seen them till
giving his evidence before the Court.
12. P.W.-3: S.I. Jagat Narayan Singh is the informant. He
has corroborated the statements contained in his
written report and stated that in the night, he went for
patrolling duty for detecting the criminals involved in
electric wire theft. He reached near the Dhandhara
Page 8 of 14
village and found one person wondering near the
electricity Office, who disclosed his name Ganesh
Mondal and started scuffling with this witness
meanwhile, some other miscreants about 8-10 persons
also assembled near 8-10 persons police jeep out of
them he has identified Nimai Mondal and does not
know name of others. He has specifically stated that
other persons who were assembled, he does not know
who assaulted to Constable Thakur Dayal Yadav by
lathi. Ganesh Mondal torn his uniform and attempted
to take away his revolver. Thereafter, Officer-in-Charge
was informed who arrived at place of occurrence and
accused persons fled away. He has further stated that
injured Constable Thakur Dayal Yadav was medically
treated at Gutgutia Nursing Home. He has identified
the accused Ganesh @ Gansha, Bandhan Mandal and
Kartik Mondal fail to identify.
In his cross-examination, this witness has
categorically admitted that he was not acquainted with
the accused Ganesh prior to the incident. He has also
not conducted TIP about the suspect accused person.
He also admits that his torn uniform was given to the
Investigating Officer. He might have prepared seizure
list.
Page 9 of 14
He has denied the suggestion of defence that in the
night of the Diwali some people used to gamble, who
might have been scuffled with the police personnels
and the present appellants have been falsely
implicated in this case.
13. P.W.-4 : S.I. Umesh Ram is the Investigating Officer of
this case. He has recorded the re-statement of the
informant and injured Thakur Dayal Yadav, Ram
Awadhesh Singh, Sadan Singh, Jeep Driver Biseswar
Sah and sent requisition for treatment of Thakur Dayal
Yadav, Ramashray, Biseswar Sah etc. He has further
stated that place of occurrence is situated at square
type road in Village – Dhandhara.
In his cross-examination, he admitted in the
requisition slip for medical examination of Thakur
Dayal Yadav, time has not been mentioned. The
requisition was issued to private nursing home and not
to Sadar Hospital. He has admitted that Nimai Mondal
was not charge-sheeted in this case. He has also not
conducted TIP of the accused persons.
He has denied the suggestion of defence that his
investigation is defective and he has not fairly
investigated the case.
14. P.W.-5 – Dr. S.K. Gutgutia is the Medical Officer, who
has examined the Constable No. 290 Thakur Dayal
Yadav of Jamtara P.S. and found following injuries:-
Page 10 of 14
(i) Swelling and pain in left shoulder not able to lift
the shoulder, atromial process is prominent
(anterior dis-location of right shoulder).
(ii) Pain and swelling in the left leg below knee
swelling 2″ x 2″ no bonyletion.
(iii) Pain on the left side of the chest and anterior
axillary line at the level of 7 th rib. No crepitate.
15. P.W.-6 Biseswar Sah – He has been declared hostile.
16. P.W.-7 – Thakur Dayal Yadav is the sole injured of
this case. According to his evidence, he was also
member of the raiding party. One person scuffle with
the police who disclosed his name as Ganesh Mandal
and has torn the uniform of Sub-Inspector Jagat
Narayan and also blocked the road and protested
against proceeding of the police jeep. He was assaulted
one lathi blow by Ganesh and cause left leg. One of the
persons in the crowd attempted to snatch the revolver
of police and when Officer-in-Charge arrived, the
accused persons fled away. His medical treatment was
conducted at Jamtara Nursing Home. He further
explains that a person of short height assaulted him. It
was dark night and he did not identify him. He has
failed to identify the accused Nimai Mondal, but
identified one Kartik Mondal and none of the other
accused persons have been identified by him.
Page 11 of 14
In his cross-examination, he fairly admits that the
Ganesh Mondal was not acquainted to him prior to the
occurrence and he has not identified any of the
miscreants in any TI Parade. He has not claimed at the
time of investigation to identify any of the miscreants
and after the occurrence, he has seen the accused
Kartik Mondal first time present in the Court. There
was dark night on the date of occurrence.
He has denied the suggestion of prosecution that
he has given absolutely false evidence as regards
presence and participation of the accused persons in
the alleged offence.
17. From perusal of the aforesaid evidence of the
witnesses including the single injured Constable
(P.W.-7), it transpires that the sole injured has stated
that he has sustained injury on his leg, but in the
medical report, there is dis-location on his shoulder
and no visible injury was found caused by any lathi
blow. It further appears that none of the witnesses
have been able to clearly identify all the appellants
showing their individual overt act in the alleged
offence. The genesis of the occurrence is alleged to be
detection of electric wire thieves, which was frequent
in the Electricity Department. The prosecution has
also not brought on record that the accused persons
were ever prosecuted or suspected for commission of
Page 12 of 14
any theft of electric wire in the locality. It appears that
simple scuffle arose between Ganesh Mondal and
Sub-Inspector and Ganesh Mondal used some blunt
answer. Hence, the villagers assembled and protested
the same and road was blocked, otherwise
prosecution has miserably failed to prove the reason
for blockage of the road by the villagers by putting
bullock carts as appears in the evidence of witnesses.
18. In my considered view, the evidence of prosecution
witnesses suffers from material contradictions and
infirmity as regards genesis, manner and place of
occurrence as well as participation of the appellants
in the alleged crime and their identification by the
witnesses. Therefore, the conviction and sentence of
the appellants do not appear to be based on cogent
and reliable evidence, rather prosecution has
miserably failed to prove the charges leveled against
the appellants beyond all reasonable doubt. In this
view of the matter, the impugned judgment of
conviction and order of sentence of the appellant
dated 23.03.2006 passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge-II, Jamtara in Sessions Case No.
198/2000 and Sessions Case No. 18/2004 is hereby
set aside.
19. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed.
Page 13 of 14
20. Appellants are on bail as such, they are discharged
from the liability of bail bond. Sureties are also
discharged.
21. Pending I.A., if any, stand disposed of.
22. Let a copy of this judgment along with trial court
record be sent back to the court concerned for
information and needful.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi
Dated, the 28 t h January, 2025.
Sunil / N.A.F.R.
Page 14 of 14
[ad_1]
Source link