1
GR Case No.3251/2009
DISTRICT : CACHAR
IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, SILCHAR
GR Case No.3251/2009
Under Section:-380 of I.P.C
State of Assam
....... Complainant
–Vs–
Md. Abdul Jalil Laskar @ Jalil Mia.
........ Accused
PRESENT
:
Jafar Md. Azizul Karim Tapadar , AJS
15th day of June, 2015
APPEARANCE:
For the State:
For the accused:
Ld. APP
MR. Debasish Sen Gupta ,Ld. Advocate
Date of Evidence:
Date of Argument:
Date of Judgment:
15.06.15
15.06.15
15.06.15
JUDGMENT
1.
The prosecution case in brief is that Informant Joymoti Tori, filed a complaint
before CJM, Silchar which is forwarded to the Officer - In – charge Sonai Police
Station on 08.09.09, stating inter alia that on 06.09.2009 at about 12:00 PM
noon, the accused Md. Abdul Jalil Laskar @ Jalil Mia armed with Dao, illegally
trespassed into the house of informant, Joymoti Tori and aiming at her
threatening not to raise alarm and without her consent had sexual intercourse
with her and took away Rs.2500/- and Colour TV along with them. That the
accused persons took the advantage of absence of the family members of the
informant. After the departure of the accused persons the informant raised hue
2
GR Case No.3251/2009
and cry hearing which the neighbouring people gathered her house and she
narrated the entire occurrence to them. Hence the case.
2.
The informant lodged FIR on 08.09.2009 before Sonai PS. On receipt of the FIR
on 08.09.09, Sonai Police Station registered the case vide Sonai Police Case
No.282/09 dt.08.09.09 under Section.448/376/506/380 of IPC and after
completion of investigation charge sheet No.271/09 dated 25.11.09 was
submitted under Section 380 of IPC against the accused Md. Abdul Jalil Laskar
@ Jalil Mia.
3.
The accused person appeared before Court on receipt of process and copies of
relevant documents were furnished to them under Section 207 of Cr.P.C. and
particulars of offences u/s-380 of IPC are read over and explained to the accused
person to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
4.
During trial prosecution examined two witnesses viz. The informant, Joymoti Kuri
as PW.1 and Shibu Kuri as W.2, however defence declined to adduce any
evidence. The recording of statement of the accused person u/s 313 of Cr.P.C.
has been dispensed with on consideration of the evidence on record.
POINTS FOR DETERMINATION
5.
Whether the accused Md. Abdul Jalil Laskar @ Jalil Mia committed theft of cash
money and one TV from the dwelling house of the informant Joymoti Tori and
thereby committed offence punishable under Section.380 of IPC.
6.
I have heard arguments of both sides and carefully examined the evidence on
record.
DISCUSSION on EVIDENCE , DECISION and REASON THEREOF
7.
PW.1, Informant Joymoti Tori, the informant in his examination in chief
contended that she do not know the accused present in the dock. That about 5
years back on certain day during day time in the absence of her husband,
presentee accused along with another person entered into her house and by
force took away TV from her house.
3
GR Case No.3251/2009
PW.1 further deposed that later on her co-villagers asked her to file a case and
accordingly she filed the instant case in the court.
During cross examination PW.1 deposed that people of her community brought
her to police station to file the case. That her co-villagers took her RTI on the
FIR.
PW.1 admitted that she do not know what is written in the FIR. She also
admitted that accused present in the dock did not took TV from her house but
has identified her house to the TV shop Owner. That her husband had a dispute
with the TV shop owner in regard to Business and the said TV as she learnt from
her husband. That presentee accused did not came to her house and did not
took the TV.
8.
PW.2, Shibu Kuri deposed in his chief that he is the husband of the informant.
That the accused present in the dock is known to him as his neighbour.
That about 4/5 years ago his wife filed the instant case. That on the day of
occurrence he was out of home for his work purpose and on return to house at
about 3:00 PM, his wife told him that two persons came to their house in his
absence and one of them remained outside the house and the other took away
the TV from their house. Then his wife filed this case.
During cross examination PW.2 deposed that his wife filed this case on instigation
of the co-villagers as he learnt the same from her(informant). That later on he
learnt that TV from his house was taken away by TV Shop owner from whose
shop he(PW.2) purchased the same.
PW.2 deposed further that he or his wife have no adverse relationship with the
accused person today.
9.
On careful scrutiny of the evidence on record it has been revealed from the cross
examination of informant/PW.1 that accused present in the dock did not took TV
from her house but has identified her house to the TV shop Owner.
PW.2 deposed in his examination in chief that on the day of occurrence he was
out of home for his work purpose and on return to house at about 3:00 PM, his
wife told him that two persons came to their house in his absence and one of
them remained outside the house and the other took away the TV from their
house. Then his wife filed this case and he (PW.2) also deposed in his cross
examination that on he learnt that TV from his house was taken away by TV
Shop owner from whose shop he(PW.2) purchased the same.
The evidence of PW.2 is of hearsay nature and as such has no evidentiary value.
Informant in her FIR stated that on the day of occurrence about 12:00 PM noon,
the accused Md. Abdul Jalil Laskar @ Jalil Mia armed with Dao, illegally
4
GR Case No.3251/2009
trespassed into the house of informant, Joymoti Tori and aiming at her
threatening not to raise alarm and without her consent had sexual intercourse
with her and took away Rs.2500/- and Colour TV along with them and to
corroborate the same, in her chief she stated specifically that present accused
along with another person entered into her house and by force took away TV
from her house but during cross examination she made fatal contradiction by
deposing that present accused did not came to her house and did not took the
TV.
As such from the evidence of informant it was came to the light that accused
who is present in the dock for aforesaid allegation is not known to her(informant)
and further it also came to light that present accused is not the person who
entered into her house on the day of occurrence and took the TV.
10.
Thus, in the light of the discussion, observation and the reasons, conclusion
drawn, is, that the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused Md.
Abdul Jalil LAskar @ Jalil Mia beyond all reasonable doubt.
11.
Thus the accused Md. Abdul Jalil LAskar @ Jalil Mia is acquitted from the charges
of offences punishable under Section. 380 of IPC and set at liberty forthwith.
12.
The bail bonds shall remain in force for next six months from the date of this
judgment.
Judgment is pronounced and delivered under my hand and seal of this Court on
this the 15th day of June, 2015.
(Typed by me)
Jafar Md. Azizul Karim Tapadar
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Silchar
Jafar Md. Azizul Karim Tapadar
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Silchar
5
GR Case No.3251/2009
APPENDIX
1. Witnesses for Prosecution
1. P.W. 1 : Informant Joymoti Tori
2. P.W. 2 : Shibu Kuri
2. Witnesses for Defence
NIL
3. Court Witnesses
NIL
4. Prosecution Exhibits
Nil
5. Defence Exhibits
NIL
6. Court Exhibits
NIL
Jafar Md. Azizul Karim Tapadar
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Silchar