1
IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS,
AT MORIGAON
C.R.No. – 785/2014
U/S. 341/406 r/w 34 of I.P.C.
Md. Abdul Rahman
-Versus1. Md. Mainuddin
2. Md. Nizamuddin
3. Md. Farzul Islam
4. Md. Emradul Islam
5. Md. Mazibur Rahman
6. Md. Jiarul Islam
7. Md. Saidul Islam
8. Md. Abu Bakkar Siddique
9. Md. Saddam Hussain
10. Md. Abdul Jalil
11. Md. Sirajuddin
12. Md. Abu Kalam
13. Md. Abdul Rahim……accused persons
Present : Smt. Pooja Sinha, AJS,
Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Morigaon
Advocate appearing for the Complainant
: Sri Gopendra Singha Deka
Sri Tapan Boro
Advocate appearing for the Accused persons : Sri Bulan Ch. Saikia
Dates of recording Evidence
: 23.12.2014, 12.02.2015 and 19.02.2015
Date of hearing Argument
: 03.03.2015
Date of delivering Judgment
: 09.03.2015
2
JUDGMENT
1. Brief fact of the case :- The case of the prosecution is that the Complainant
Abdul Rahman on 08.09.2014 at about 11 a.m. went to the house of accused
Md. Mainuddin and asked for Rs.21,000/- back from him as Abdul Rahman
handed over the said amount to Mainuddin in advance for rice bags. But, the
accused denied taking any money from Abdul Rahman and on direction of Md.
Mainuddin was restrained by other twelve accused persons Md. Nizamuddin,
Md. Farzul Islam, Md. Emradul Islam, Md. Mazibur Rahman, Md. Jiarul Islam,
Md. Saidul Islam, Md. Abu Bakkar Siddique, Md. Saddam Hussain, Md. Abdul
Jalil, Md. Sirajuddin, Md. Abu Kalam and Md. Abdul Rahim who were about to
beat him (Abdul Rahman ) when Abdul Kasem and Abdul Jalil came and
rescued him.
2. To that effect he lodged a written complaint before this court. On receipt of
complaint a criminal case was registered and kept the same in this court for
disposal. After due enquiry found sufficient grounds to proceed under section
341/406 r/w 34 IPC against the accused persons, Md. Mainuddin, Md.
Nizamuddin, Md. Farzul Islam, Md. Emradul Islam, Md. Mazibur Rahman, Md.
Jiarul Islam, Md. Saidul Islam, Md. Abu Bakkar Siddique, Md. Saddam Hussain,
Md. Abdul Jalil, Md. Sirajuddin, Md. Abu Kalam and Md. Abdul Rahim. Hence,
the prosecution case has come out.
3. On completion of the appearance of the accused persons, evidence before
charge was recorded , thereafter formal charge was made U/S 406
I.P.C.
against Md.Mainuddin and U/S 341/34 against Md. Mainuddin, Md. Nizamuddin,
Md. Farzul Islam, Md. Emradul Islam, Md. Mazibur Rahman, Md. Jiarul Islam,
Md. Saidul Islam, Md. Abu Bakkar Siddique, Md. Saddam Hussain, Md. Abdul
Jalil, Md. Sirajuddin, Md. Abu Kalam and Md. Abdul Rahim. The particulars of
the offence U/S 406 and 341r/w 34 of I.P.C. was read over and duly explained
to the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be
tried.
3
4.
During trial, the prosecution has examined
three
witnesses including
complainant himself . The accused persons has been examined U/S.313 Cr.P.C.
The plea of defence is of total denial. Defence opted not to adduce evidence.
5. Points for Determination :
(I)Whether the accused person being entrusted with the belongings of
Md. Abdul Rahman committed criminal breach of trust by not
returning the same on 08.09.2014 and thereby committed an offence
U/S 406 of I.P.C.?and
(II) Whether the accused persons in furtherance
of common
intention wrongfully restrained Md. Abdul Rahman and committed an
offence U/S 341 of I.P.C.?
6.
Discussion, Decision and Reasons thereof :-
I have heard the learned
Counsel appearing for the Complainant. Also heard the learned Counsel
appearing for the accused person . Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the
parties and on perusal of the records, I am of the considered opinion to hold
the following :
Both the points are taken up together for proper analyzing and discussion of
the evidence on record.
Point of Determination No. I &II:
7. P.W.1 – Md. Abdul Rahman is the Complainant, he in his evidence
deposed that on 08.09.2014 at about 11 a.m. went to the house of accused
Md. Mainuddin and asked for Rs.21,000/- back from him as Abdul Rahman
handed over the said amount to Mainuddin in two installments of Rs.19,000/on 19.07.2014 and Rs. 2,000/- on 28.07.2014 in advance for rice bags. But, the
accused denied taking any money from Abdul Rahman nor did he gave any rice
bags to Abdul Rahman in return and on direction of Md. Mainuddin was
restrained by other twelve accused persons Md. Nizamuddin, Md. Farzul Islam,
4
Md. Emradul Islam, Md. Mazibur Rahman, Md. Jiarul Islam, Md. Saidul Islam,
Md. Abu Bakkar Siddique, Md. Saddam Hussain, Md. Abdul Jalil, Md. Sirajuddin,
Md. Abu Kalam and Md. Abdul Rahim who beat him up , when Abdul Kasem
and Abdul Jalil came and rescued him and brought him back home. He further
deposed that, both Abdul Kasem and Abdul Jalil were present when he gave Rs.
21,000/- to Md. Mainuddin.
During his cross-examination,
he stated that no written agreement was
made between him and accused person Md. Mainuddin. Defence brought to
light a relevant fact that P.w.1 has filed many cases against the accused
persons as this fact is admitted by P.W.1 . Moreover, Abdul Kasem and Abdul
Jalil are witnesses to each and every case instituted by him.
P.W.1’s testimony is to be considered with caution as there is
previous animosity with accused persons, thus slated as inimical
witness. No written agreement to prove the alleged offence of breach
of trust brought to record, to prove the alleged offence.
8.
P.W. 2 Md. Abdul Kasem is the brother-in-law of the Complainant, he
deposed in the same lines with P.W.1. But, during his cross-examination he
stated that he has not deposed as witness in any of the cases instituted by
P.W.1 other than the instant case. This is contradictory to what P.W.1 stated.
Further, admitted accused persons has instituted a case against him.
P.W. 2’s testimony is unreliable considering the cross-examination
part. His testimony is not trustworthy , moreover he is interested and
inimical witness.
9.
P.W.3 Md. Abdul Jalil is the brother of the Complainant, he deposed in
the same lines with P.W.1 and P.W.2 . During his cross-examination, he stated
that he has deposed as witness in other case instituted by P.W.1 other than the
instant case.. Further, admitted accused persons has instituted a case against
them prior to the instant case.
5
P.W.3’s testimony is not credible considering the cross-examination
part. His testimony is not trustworthy , moreover he is interested and
inimical witness.
10.
Considering the above discussion, My observation is –
1. There are discrepancies in the testimonies put forward by the Prosecution.
2. No documentary evidence is adduced.
3. Quality of evidence is poor considering them as inimical witnesses.
4. Point to be considered, if the Complainant was not maintaining good terms
with the accused persons , so entering into agreement and handing of
money to accused person is not believable.
11.
As a result, the prosecution has failed to prove the point of
guilt
beyond reasonable doubt that the accused person Md. Mainuddin
being entrusted with money Rs.21,000/- belonging to Md. Abdul
Rahman committed criminal breach of trust by not returning the same
on 08.09.20-14 and thereby committed an offence U/S 406 of IPC and
the accused persons in furtherance of common intention wrongfully
restrained Md. Abdul Rahman and committed an offence U/S 341 of
I.P.C.
12.
In the result, the accused person Md. Mainuddin is hereby acquitted on benefit
of doubt from the charges leveled against him U/S 406 of I.P.C and the accused
persons Md. Mainuddin, Md. Nizamuddin, Md. Farzul Islam, Md. Emradul Islam,
Md. Mazibur Rahman, Md. Jiarul Islam, Md. Saidul Islam, Md. Abu Bakkar
Siddique, Md. Saddam Hussain, Md. Abdul Jalil, Md. Sirajuddin, Md. Abu Kalam
and Md. Abdul Rahim are hereby acquitted on benefit of doubt from the
charges leveled against him U/S 341 r/w 34 of I.P.C set at liberty forthwith.
6
13.
Bail bonds furnished are hereby extended for a period of 6 (six) months.
14.
The case is disposed of on contest.
Given under my hand and seal of this court on this the 9th
March, 2015 at Morigaon.
( Pooja Sinha )
Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Morigaon
Typed and corrected by me
( Pooja Sinha )
Judicial Magistrate First Class,Morigaon
day of
7
APPENDIX
Prosecution Witness1.
P.W.1- Md. Abdul Rahman
2.
P.W.2- Md. Abdul Kasem
3.
P.W.3- Md. Abdul Jalil
Defence WitnessNil
Prosecution Side ExhibitsNil
Defence Side ExhibitsNil
( Pooja Sinha )
Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Morigaon