- (1.) NOBODY appears on behalf of the appellant on repeated call. At the request of the Court Mr. P. K. Sahay, Advocate argued the case on behalf of the appellant as amicus curiae.
(2.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 10.5.2001 and order of sentence dated 11.5.2001 passed by Shri Satya Prakash, 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka in Sessions Case No. 142 of 1996, by which judgment he found the appellant guilty under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/ - and on default of payment of fine to undergo for further R.I. for 3 months. While he acquitted the other accused, Suresh Dehri and Md. Akhtar Hussain @ Disco. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the conviction of the appellant, Shibu Dehari on the basis of a single identification made by P.W. 1 - informant, Dular Murmu, who admits that the appellant Shibu Dehari was known to her from before and he used to come everyday to his house. In spite of that it is not acceptable that how he will come for committing the dacoity in his house without concealing his face in view of the fact that there was no source of light for identification and other witnesses have stated that it was a dark night. In that view of the matter, the appellant deserves to be given benefit of doubt and acquitted him from the charges. He has further submitted that the other accused persons, namely, Md. Akhtar Hussain @ Disco, who was also identified by P.Ws. 1 & 6, was acquitted from the charges and other accused, Suresh Dehri, who was also identified by all the witnesses also acquitted from the charges. In that view of the matter, the trial court has made double standard for convicting the sole appellant only on the evidence of single witness.
(3.) ON the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that since identification of one witness was sufficient and as such the court has rightly convicted the sole appellant.;