RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY,J. - (1.) Heard the parties.
(2.) This application is directed against the judgment dated 16.3.2004, passed by the learned IInd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dumka in Cr. Appeal No. 43 of 1991, whereby and whereunder, the judgement and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Dumka in connection with Dumka (M) P.S. Case No. 7/84, convicting the petitioner for the offence under sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to under go R.I. for two months, 3 month and 4 months respectively, has been affirmed.
(3.) It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Investigating Officer of the case has not been examined, which has caused prejudice to the case of the defence. It has further been submitted that the witnesses, who were examined, were not consistent in their evidence and there are major contradictions amongst the statements of the witnesses and in such circumstances, therefore, petitioner's deserves acquittal.;