IN THE COURT OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
DIBRUGARH
Case No. GR 1846/03
State
-vs-
Sri Anjan Kumar.... Accused
PRESENT
Smti.Rita Kar
C.J.M.Dibrugarh
Dates of evidence :- 7-9-11, 14-3-12 & 21-2-13
Date of Argument :- 7-3-13
Date of Judgment :- 20-3-13
Appearance
For the prosecution :- Addl.P.P.
For the defence :- Sri A.K.Shah,state defence counsel.
J U D G M E N T
Prosecution case in brief is that, on 24-11-03 at about 10-3- a.m. Accused Anjan Kumar without any reason assaulted complainant Shyamal Paul causing severe injury on his left hand . Hence the case.
After receiving FIR a case has been registered being Namrup P.S.Case No. 115/03.
After due investigation police submitted charge-sheet u/s 325 IPC against accused Anjan Kumar.
Attendance of the accused could not be procured as such W/A and P&A was issued against him. Subsequently he was arrested and forwarded to the judicial custody. The accused was state defence counsel to defend his case
Copies u/s 207 Cr.P.C. Has been furnished to the accused and after hearing both sides and perusing relevant materials charge u/s 325 IPC was framed against the accused and same was read over and explained to him to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
-2-
Subsequently the accused was enlarged on bail,but he again defaulted in his appearence and W/A was issued against him and he was arrested and forwarded to the judicial custody and there from he faced the trial.
Prosecution has examined four witnesses including the M.O. And I.O.
Statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. Obtained.
Defence case :- defence has adopted plea of denial and examined none.
POINT FOR DETERMINATION
Whether accused Anjan Kumar on 24-11-03 voluntarily caused grievous hurt to Shyamal Kr. Paul with an iron rod and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 325 IPC ?
DISCUSSION OF EVIDENCE,DECISION AND REASON THEREOF
PW 1 Shyamal Paul is the complainant. He has deposed that on 24-11-03 the occurrence took place. On the day of occurrence at about 10-30 p.m. When he was returning to his house after closing his shop then the accused told him to perform V.D.P.duty,but as he did not agree the accused gave a blow on his left hand with an iron rod and went away. He (PW 1) fell down on the ground and sustained fracture on his left hand. Then other VDP persons brought him to his house. On the next day he took treatment at Namrup BVFCL Hospital.
PW 2 Sahabjan Ali has deposed that he knows the complainant and the accused. In the year 2003 the occurence took place. On the day of occurrence at about 7/8 p.m. He was standing near the shop of Shyamal Paul. Then accused Anjan Kumar assaulted Shyamal Paul
-3-
with a rod and Shyamal Paul fell down. He lifted Shyamal Paul and sent the accused there from.He brought Shyamal Paul to his house.
PW 3 Dr.Tapan Sharma is the M.O.and PW 4 Jiban Krishna Bhowal is the I.O.
In course of cross-examination of PW 1 and PW 2 defence could not extract anything from their mouths which can shake their evidence. PW 2 has corroborated the statement of PW 1. There is no reason to disbelieve the evidence of PW 1 and PW 2. Defence has given suggestion to PW 1 that the accused has not caused any incident but both Pws have denied this fact.
M.O. Has substantiated the fact that Shyamal Paul sustained fracture of ulnar bone at the lower 1/3rd of the fore arm. Fracture was proved by X-Ray. Weapon used was blut weapon and nature of injury was grievous.
PW 4 I.O. In his cross-examination has stated that on going to the place of occurrence he did not find the rod by which the accused assaulted the complainant.
Now evidence of PW 1 and PW 2 is found trustworthy and medical evidence has also substantiated the fact that the complainant sustained grievous injury on his left fore-arm.
Now as per section 320 IPC fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth has been designated as grievous hurt.
In the instant case it is proved by medical evidence that complainant Shyamal Paul has sustained fracture of ulnar bone of left fore-arm. Ocular evidence has also substantiated this fact.
-4-
In view of discussion of above evidence I have arrived at the conclusion that accused Anjan Kumar isfound to be guilty for committing offence u/s 325 IPC.
FINDING
I have heard submission of both sides and gone through the case record. I have arrived at the finding that prosecution has succeeded to establish its case. Accused Anjan Kumar is found guilty of committing offence u/s 325 IPC and accordingly he is convicted under this section. Considering the nature of offence I am not inclining to extend the benefit of Probation of Offenders” Act to the accused.
SENTENCE
Heard the accused on sentence. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the matter in its entirety accused Anjan Kumar is sentenced to undergo R.I.for 1 ( one) year and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- ( Rupees one thousand) in default S.I. For 1 ( one) month.
Period of detention already undergone by the accused be set off u/s 428 Cr.P.C.
Free copy of te judgment be furnished to the accused
Judgment is delivered on this 20th day of March/13 under my hand and seal of the court.
Chief Judicial Magistrate
Dibrugarh
Printed by
A.K.Chakravarty
-5-
APPENDIX
Prosecution witnesses
PW 1 :- Sri Shyamal Paul
PW 2 :- Sahabjan Ali
PW 3 :- Dr. Tapan Sharma
PW 4:- Jiban Krishna Paul, I.O.
Prosecution Exhibit
Ext.1 :-FIR
Ext.2 :- Medical report
Ext.3 :- Charge-sheet
Defence witness and Exhibit :- NIL
Material Exhibit :- NIL
Chief Judicial Magistrate
Dibrugarh