BHANU LAL DAS Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA
LAWS(GAU)-1958-1-1
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on January 10,1958

Bhanu Lal Das Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF TRIPURA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

PANDA INDERJIT V. EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF VIN -DHYA PRADESH V. SAMA MUNNI DHIMAR [REFERRED TO]
PARAKINKAR CHAKMA V. STATE OF TRIPURA [REFERRED TO]
KOLI BHAGU RANCHHOD V. STATE [REFERRED TO]
STATE VS. RAM AUTAR CHAUDHRY [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

J.N.DATTA,J. - (1.)APPELLANTS (1) Bhanulal Das, (2) Jogendra Marak, his brother, (3) Nagendra Marak, all of Madhuban village and (4) Naman Marak of Mahishmara village were tried along with another (who was acquitted) before the Assistant Sessions Judge, Tripura, who convicted them for dacoity punishable under Section 395 of the IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo Rule I, for a term of five years.
(2.)THE dacoity which was not disputed and for which there was ample evidence, was committed by unknown persons, at the cloth shop of Pra -bhat Datta (P.W. 1) between 8 -30 and 9 P, M. on 24 -8 -1954 at Shekerkut village which is about 9 miles from the Police station at Agartala and is situated on a motorable road connecting it with Agartala.
The shop in question is located in the Bazar at Shekerkut, and there me other shops in its vicinity and at the time of commission of the dacoity a gas lamp was burning in the shop, There were some others also sitting with P.W. 1 in the shop, when the dacoits numbering about ten came there, and at the point of revolvers took away cash, cloth and other articles from the shop and two rings from the fingers of P.W. 1. All this happened within about 5 minutes, and a hue and cry being raised as soon as the dacoits left, others 4 came on the spot.

The village Choukidar Kartick Tanti (P.W. 10) at once left for Agartala and lodged information about it with the Officer -in -charge who (P.W. 15) in turn hastened to the spot in a motor vehicle. The oral report given by P.W. 10 was not recorded, and P.W. 15 recorded the report of P.W. 1 on the spot, which was treated as the F. I. R. under Section 154.

(3.)SOME property was alleged to have been seized in the course of investigation from the possession of some of the accused persons which was identified to belong to P.W. 1 and was removed in the course of the said dacoity by the dacoits. The appellants and several other persons who were arrested on suspicion were got identified, and these five identified persons were placed on trial.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.