P. K. MUSAHARY, J. - (1.) HEARD Mr. S. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Ghosh, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the State-respondent.
(2.) THIS revision application has been filed under Section 401 of Cr.P.C. read with Section 397 of Cr.P.C. challenging the impugned judgment and order dated 02.01.2003 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala in Criminal Appeal No. 5 (1)/2002 affirming the judgment dated 13.12.2001 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class in Case No.GR 176 of 1999 convicting the petitioner under Section 326 of IPC and sentencing him to suffer RI for 6 (six) months and also to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer SI for a term of two months. Briefly, the story projected by the prosecution is that, on 28.02.1999 one Smti. Jyotsna Dey lodged FIR in the West Agartala P.S. to the effect that on the same day at about 5 p.m. her neighbours namely Shri Pranab Roy and Partha Roy @ Partha Sarathi Roy assaulted her son Shri Dilip Dey causing serious injury and he was admitted in hospital for treatment. On the basis of the aforesaid FIR, a crime being West Agartala P.S. Case No. 34 of 1999 was registered under Sections 326/34, IPC against the aforesaid named accused persons. On completion of the investigation, the police laid charge-sheet against them under Sections 447/326/34, IPC. After completion of the trial, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Agartala, West Tripura convicted the accused Partha Sarathi Roy under Section 326 of IPC and sentenced him to suffer RI for a term of six months and also to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-. Being dissatisfied and aggrieved by the aforesaid conviction and sentence, the accused Shri Partha Sarathi Roy preferred an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 5(1) of 2002 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala. The aforesaid appeal was heard and disposed of by the judgment dated 02.01.2003 upholding the conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Court. The aforesaid appeal was accordingly dismissed.
(3.) THE accused, above named, being further aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment of the learned appellate Court has filed the present revision petition. The main ground taken by the accused petitioner is that PWs 1, 4, 6, 9 and 10 stated that the injured Dilip Dey was assaulted by one Shri Pranab Roy, father of the petitioner and some of them being eye witnesses did not utter any single word that the accused petitioner assaulted the said Dilip Dey and in any way abetted the offence as there was no charge of abetment of offence and as such the learned trial Court should have acquitted the petitioner from the charge levelled against him.;