SUDAMA GIRI; SHANKAR GIRI AND RITESH KUMAR @ MUNNA GIRI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 24.5.2001 and order of sentence dated 25.5.2001 passed by Shri Rameshwar Tiwary, Special Judge, S.C. and S.T.(P.O.A.) Act, Palamau at Daltanganj in Sessions Trial No. 06 of 1995. against the appellants namely Sudama Giri, Shankar Giri, Ritesh Kumar @ Munna Giri by which all the three appellants have been found guilty for the offence under Section 323,448 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them each to undergo S.I. for three months. Further, the trial court has convicted the appellants under Section 3 of the S.C/S.T. (P.O.A) Act and sentenced them to undergo S.I. for six months each with both the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case was started on the F.I.R. given by the informant, Suresh Ram in which he has stated that he was assaulted for not doing the work of the accused persons, disobeying the order of appellant, Sudama Giri who asked the informant to clean the grain from the paddy chaft because the air was blowing fast. He was called 'chamar' by the accused persons and subsequently the accused persons again came and assaulted him and his wife. On the basis of which the police registered a case under Section 323/448 of the I.P.C. and Section 3 of the SC/ST (P.O.A.) Act and after investigation, police submitted charge sheet. Learned C.J.M. took cognizance of the case and committed the case to the court of Special Judge, S.C. and S.T. (P.O.A.) Act, Palamau at Daltonganj.

(3.) It appears that during the trial, the prosecution has examined five witnesses including C.W.1 Dr. Kanhaiya Singh to bring home the charges against the accused persons. P.W.1 is Geeta Devi, wife of the informant and one of the victim. P.W.2 is Suresh Ram, informant himself. P.W.3 is Ramdeo Yadav. P.W.4 is Mujibul Khan, constable is a formal witness who has simply proved the F.I.R. Dr. Kanhaiya Singh, the Medical Officer of Hussainabad P.H.C., who examined and treated the informant and his wife, has been examined as C.W.1 under Section 311 Cr.P.C.