Citation or Judjment Acquitted in section 353 of IPC in the absence of evidence

acquitted in section 353 of IPC

DISTRICT: HAILAKANDI

IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE 1ST CLASS HAILAKANDI

G.R. Case No. 136/2010

( U/S 353/379 I.P.C.)

STATE
Vs.
Siraj Uddin Mazumdar
…………….Accused Person
PRESENT: Gautam Daimari
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class,Hailakandi
For the Prosecution: Monica Deb, Learned APP
For the Defence: Farid Ahmed Laskar,Md. Afjal Hussain Laskar, Ld. Counsels
Date of Recording Evidence:07/08/2014
Date of Argument.13/08/2014
Date of Judgment .25/08/2014
J-U-D-G-M-E-N-T
1. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that on 02/02/2010 when a confidential meeting
was going on against the president Saidbad G.P. at Zilla Parishad Office one Siraj Uddin
Mazumdar, member Saidbad G.P accompanied by other four members suddenly snatched
the proceeding register, no-confidence file etc. and also assaulted physically the
informant Badar Uddin Laskar. As a result Badar Uddin Laskar lodged an FIR with the
police Hailakandi and hence the instant case.
2. On receipt of information a case was registered at Hailakandi Police Station vide
Hailakandi P.S Case No.0055/2010 dated 02/0207/2010 under section 448/353/332/380
IPC of Indian Penal Code and on completion of investigation police submitted Charge
2 Sheet No.94/11 dated 31/05/2011 against Siraj Uddin Mazumadar under section
448/353/380 of Indian Penal Code.
3. Upon appearance of the accused Siraj Uddin Majumdar, the copies were furnished to him
and charges under section 353/379 of I.P.C. were framed; particulars of offence under the
said section of law were explained to the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and
claimed for trial.
1. During the trial the prosecution examined only two witnesses in order to prove its case.
At the conclusion of the prosecution evidence, the statements of the accused were
recorded Under Section 313 of the criminal Procedure Code, where he took the stand of
false implications. On being asked whether he wanted to adduce evidence in support of
him, the accused person refused to adduce any evidence for defending himself.
4. I have heard the arguments advanced by both the sides. The case record is also perused
along with the depositions on record. Accordingly the moot point for decision of the case
is framed as bellow……..
(i) Whether the accused Siraj Uddin Laskar on 02/02/2010 after
snatching the proceeding register, no-confidence file etc.
physically assaulted Badar Uddin Laskar.
DISCUSSION on EVIDENCE, DECISION and REASONS THEREOF
5. Now let me discuss the materials on record to arrive at a definite finding as regards the
point for determination.
PW1 deposed in his examination-in chief that he filed the ejahar vide Ex.1
wherein Ex. 1(1) is his signature. He deposed that the incident took place in 2010 and at
that time he was the Secretary of the Saidband G.P. On that day an altercation took place
between him and the accused and therefore the informant lodged the FIR. PW1 further
deposed in examination-in-chief that they settled the dispute mutually and they have been
in good terms with one another. PW1 further more deposed that he does not have any
objection to the acquittal of the accused person.
3
6. PW2 Faruk Uddin Choudhury deposed in his examination-in-chief that three/four years
ago at the Zila Parishad Office when a meeting was going on, suddenly, a dispute was
cropped up among them. Later, they settled the dispute mutually. While PW2 was crossexamined,
he deposed that on the date of occurrence there were a lot of people.
Therefore, he cannot say with whom exactly the occurrence took place. He further
deposed that he has not seen the occurrence with his own eyes.
7. Thus after going through the testimony of both the prosecution witnesses I am of the
view that there is no corroboration between the testimony of PW1 and PW2. The
testimony of PW1 is found to be highly inconsistent with that of PW2.
8. In the light of the discussion made hereinabove, I am of the view that the prosecution has
failed to prove by adducing cogent evidence the allegations brought against the accused
Siraj Uddin Laskar beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, the accused person are
acquitted and set at liberty forthwith. The bailor is discharged from all his liabilities and
the bail bond furnished to the accused stands cancelled.
9. This judgment is pronounced in open court in presence of parties and their advocates.
Given under my hand and seal of this Court on this the 25th day of August, 2014.
(Typed by me) (Gautam Daimari)
4
A-N-N-E-X-U-R-E
1. Witnesses for Prosecution
P.W. 1: Bodor Uddin Laskar
P.W.2: Faruk Uddin Choudhury
2. Witnesses for Defence
NIL
3. Court Witnesses
NIL
4. Prosecution Exhibits
Ext. 1: FIR
Ext. 1(1): Signature of Informant
5. Defence Exhibits
NIL
Gautam Daimari