Jharkhand High Court
Uday Chandra Prasad vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors on 21 January, 2015
Author: R. R. Prasad
Bench: R. R. Prasad, Ravi Nath Verma
THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 120 of 2014
Uday Chandra Prasad,
S/o Late Babulal Sao,
Resident of Bye Pass Road,
Chas, District :- Bokaro. ..... Appellant(s)
Versus
1.The State of Jharkhand
2.Krishna Gupta, S/o Late Yadunandan Prasad,
3.Geeta Devi, W/o Sri Krishna Gupta,
4.Akshay Kumar, S/o Sri Krishna Gupta,
5.Abhishek Kumar, S/o Sri Krishna Gupta,
All are residents of Bye Pass Road, Chas, District :-Bokaro.
.... Respondent(s)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI NATH VERMA
For the Appellant(s) : M/s Mukesh Kumar, Advocate.
For the State : A.P.P.
-----
09 /21.01.2015. The appellant-informant being aggrieved with that part of the judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro in S.T. Case No.355 of 2012 whereby and whereunder the court acquitted the opp. Parties No.2 to 5 of the charge under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code though the court convicted them under Sections 325, 341, and 504 of the Indian Penal Code has preferred this appeal.
It is the case of the complainant that on 26.11.2011, Junior Engineer of the Electricity Department along with 3 -4 other electricians came to the house of the informant, Udai Chandra Prasad for installing electric connection. In that course the Opp. Party Nos.2 to 5 came over there armed with lathi and danda entered into his house and started assaulting him. When he fell down, Krishna Gupta sat over his chest and started giving fist blows over his chest and Abhishek Kumar sat over his hands and started assaulting over his chest.
Further it has been alleged that the accused persons assaulted him with a view to kill as they were knowing that the informant had been grafted with the pace-maker. Both the sides adduced evidences. Upon appraisal of the evidences, the court did record that there was no intention on the part of the accused persons to kill the informant as they were not armed with weapon and that they had assaulted with fist and blows and that no intervening circumstance was there on account of which the informant was prevented from being assaulted further.
On going through the judgment, we do not find any illegality with the order under which Opp. Party Nos.2 to 5 have been acquitted of the charge under Section 307 of the I.P.C.
-2- [Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 120 of 2014] Accordingly, we do not find any merit in this appeal and hence this appeal stands dismissed.
(R. R. Prasad, J.) (R. N. Verma, J.) Sandeep/