- (1.) THE two appellants before us along with the two others jointly faced Sessions Trial No. 2 of 1979 before the Assistant Sessions Judge, Purulia on a charge under section 393 I. P. O. Two others have been acquitted. The appellants before us have been convicted for the offence under section 391 I. P. C. and each of them have been sentenced to R. I. for 8 years. So, they have come up in appeal.
(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case the two appellants along with 20 or more man raided the house of the informant Brahmananda p. S. Paathak of of village Surulia five rules away from Purulia Muffasil p. S. on 9. 10. 74 corresponding to 22nd Aswin 1381 B. S. at about 5-30 P. M. ft is alleged that after making sure that the informant was the owner of the house the dacoits assaulted him, entered into the house, searched away ornaments from the body of the formal members of the family after assaulting them and carried away a D. B. B. I,. Gun and other valuable ornaments and things from the house. The informant, however, did not offer any resistance nor raised any due and cry, rather he surreptitiously reached the Polytechnic School at Purulia and rang up the Police. Subsequently police arrived at the house of the informant to whom a written information was handed over on which formal F. I. R. was drawn up giving rise to Purulia Mufassil P. S. Case No. 7, on dated 9. 10. 74.
(3.) IN the F. I. R. the hour of occurrence is clearly stated as 17-30 hours and the date and (hour of -reporting is noted as 20-30 hours. In the F. I. R. it was clearly alleged that three members of the family of the information, viz. , his daughter anita and his wife Sudharani had identified the appellant Aswini Pathak while the informants brothers wife Sandhya Rani identified the other appellant Upai alias Gurupada Pathak. It is to be added here that in the F. I. R. two dacoties committed presumably by the same gang of dacoits in two adjacent houses, viz. that of Brahmananda, the informant and his relation and close neighbour Kashinath were recorded. The dacoity committed in the house of Kashinath,assumed greater dimension in as much as in course of that dacoity some murder was also committed. Subsequent to investigation and commitment when the case was committed to the court of sessions the case was splitted up into two, one regarding the dacoity committed in the house of kashinath and the other regarding commission of dacoity on the house 0f Brahamananda. We have been told that the learned session, Judge himself tried the case catering to dacoity communicate hense of Kashinath and all the accused now considering the case of commission of dacoity in the house of Brahmananda.;