Jharkhand High Court
Md. Khurshid @ Khurshid Alam vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite ... on 14 June, 2018
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Criminal Revision No. 693 of 2008
Against the judgment dated 28.06.2008 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge Ist, Chatra in connection with Criminal Appeal No. 73 of
2000 affirming the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated
30.05.2000 passed by the learned C.J.M., Chatra in G. R. No. 244 of 1990.
---
1.Md. Khurshid @ Khurshid Alam
2.Md. Sabir Hussain @ Md. Sabir ... ... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite Party
---
For the Petitioners : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Hardeo Singh, Advocate
---
Present:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
---
By Court: Heard Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. H. P. Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. This application is directed against the judgment dated 28.06.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Ist, Chatra in connection with Criminal Appeal No. 73 of 2000 whereby and whereunder the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 30.05.2000 passed by the learned C.J.M., Chatra in G. R. No. 244 of 1990 has been affirmed so far as conviction under Section 414 of I.P.C. is concerned and the petitioners have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years.
3. The prosecution story in brief is that the informant who is a forest guard had intercepted a jeep bearing registration no. MPP/ 1796 and on apprehension one person (petitioner no. 1) managed to flee away, whereas the driver (petitioner no. 2) was arrested and on search of the jeep, two quintals of katha biscuits were seized. On interrogating the driver of the vehicle, it was disclosed that the katha biscuits belongs to the petitioner no. 1 who was carrying the same to Banaras for sale. Based on the aforesaid allegations, G. R. No. 244 of 1990 was instituted for the offences under Sections 379, 411, 413, 414 of I.P.C. and Section 33/42 of -2- the Forest Act and under Section 84 (20) of Forest Produce Trade Act. Investigation resulted in submission of charge-sheet and after cognizance was taken, charge was framed for the offences under Sections 379, 411 & 414 of I.P.C. and under Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act. The learned trial court vide judgment dated 30.05.2000 had convicted the petitioner for the offences under Sections 379, 411 & 414 of I.P.C. and Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act and sentenced them accordingly. On an appeal being preferred by the petitioner being Criminal Appeal No. 73 of 2000, the conviction was modified and it was affirmed so far as Section 414 of I.P.C. is concerned and the petitioners were given the benefit of doubt for the offence under Sections 379 & 411 of I.P.C. and Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act.
4. In course of trial, 5 witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution.
5. P.W. 1 - Dawarika Ram has stated that on 03.05.1990 i.e., the date of occurrence, he was posted at Pitij Checknaka as a forest guard. This witness has stated that a jeep bearing registration no. MPP/ 1796 was coming towards Chatra which was apprehended and the driver of the jeep was arrested. This witness has further deposed that the katha biscuits were recovered from the jeep. P.W. 2 - Jhalu Prajapati is also a forest guard who has stated about apprehending the vehicle and 2 quintals of katha biscuits being recovered from the said vehicle. This witness has identified his signature on production-cum-seizure list which has been marked as Exhibit 1. He has also identified the signature of one Ram Narayan Ram in another production-cum-seizure list which has been marked as Exhibit 1/A. P.W. 3 - Ram Narayan Ram has also supported the fact of recovery of 2 quintals of katha biscuits from the jeep for which the petitioner no. 2 was arrested. P.W. 4 - Mahesh Dangi is an independent witness who did not support the prosecution case and thus was declared hostile by the prosecution. P.W. 5 - Santan Singh is a forest guard and also the informant of the case. This witness has stated that on secret information, a jeep bearing registration no. MPP/ 1796 was stopped and the driver of the vehicle was arrested. He has further stated that katha biscuits was recovered from the jeep and the driver has confessed to the fact that it was the petitioner no. 1 who was taking katha -3- biscuits for selling it to another place. This witness has identified his signature and writing on the report which was marked as Exhibit 2 and also identified his signature on the production-cum-seizure list which was marked as Exhibit 1/B.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that no case under Section 414 of I.P.C. is made out as against the petitioners in absence of their being any theft report. An alternative argument has been put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioners that if this court is not inclined to interfere with the judgment of conviction, the period of sentence be modified in view of the fact that the petitioner has remained for a considerable length of time in custody.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer.
8. It appears from the evidence of the witness that barring P.W. 4 who was declared hostile, all the witnesses have supported the prosecution case with respect to apprehending of petitioner no. 2 who had disclosed about the involvement of the petitioner no. 1 in attempting to sell the katha biscuits so seized to another place. The petitioner no. 1 appears to be the owner of the vehicle, whereas the petitioner no. 2 is the driver. The consistency and corroborative nature of evidence as adduced by the P.W. 1, 2, 3 and 5 clearly reveals that the prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt. The learned appellate court on correct appreciation of the factual as well as the legal aspects had acquitted the petitioner from the offences under Sections 379 and 411 of I.P.C. and Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act. However, the offence under Section 414 of I.P.C. having been proved beyond all reasonable doubt, the learned appellate court has rightly affirmed the judgment and conviction under Section 414 of I.P.C.
9. In such circumstances, therefore, the conviction under Section 414 of I.P.C. is hereby sustained. However, with respect to period of sentence imposed, it appears that the petitioners are facing the rigors of prosecution case since 1999 and have remained in custody for some time. Considering the long pendency of the case and period of incarceration undergone by the petitioners, the period of sentence imposed upon the petitioner is modified to the period already undergone by them.
-4-10. This application stands dismissed with the aforementioned modification in sentence.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J) Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi The 14th day of June, 2018 R.Shekhar/NAFR/Cp.3