Decided on March 24,1965

STATE Respondents


- (1.)THE appellants have been convicted under Sections 399 and 402 I. P. C. and sentenced to four year' rigorous imprisonment each under each of the two sections. The appellant Bhooreju has also been convicted under Section 25 (a) of the Indian Arms Act and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment All the sentences were directed to run concurrently
(2.)ACCORDING to the prosecution case, Sujan Singh (P W 1) brought information to the Sub-Inspector Hirday Narain Pandey (P. W. 4 ). at police-station Bar. in the district of Jhansi, that Bhooreju appellant had proposed to him to join in the commission of a dacoity at the house of Pannalal Binia of village Dhangol. A first information report was, accordingly taken down at 5 p m on 2nd of November. 1962 at police-station Bar in which it was mentioned that Bhooreju known to Sujan Singh from before, had made a proposal previously and also at 4 p. m. on that very day and it also contains the name of Panna Lal of Dhangol at whose house the dacoity was to be committed. It also mentions that Sujan Singh was taken by Bhooreju to a place four furlongs from the village (it is not clear which village was meant) where he saw five other men sitting and met them and noticed that one of them had a gun and another had a spear and third had a pharsa. It was not staled there that this meeting took place at any Chabutara but it was stated that the party had decided to meet at a place three furlongs from village Dhangol at a place known as Babaji-ka-chabutara near a 'nala. ' The time at which they were to met was fixed, according to this F. I. R. at 1 hours past nightfall. The Station Officer is said to have taken a party with Sujan Singh and arrested the four appellants out of the six persons found assembled at Babaji-ka-chahutara at a distance of about four furlongs from village Dhangol and to have seized a gun from Bhooreju. The Station Officer then returned to the police-station and lodged a F. I. R. at 11-30 p m. It is not even mentioned in the F. I. R. that the police-party had taken any "very-light" pistol or any torch with it. It is a perfunctory and brief report which does not contain the usual particulars.
(3.)IN support of the prosecution case the three witnesses, examined were: Sujan Singh (P. W. 1), the above mentioned informer, and the sub-inspector of police-station Bar. Hirday Narain (P W 4), and Deo Singh (P W 25, who was said to have been picked up on the way at a little distance from the place where the assemblage of dacoits is said to have taken place.

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