1|Page
IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS,
SILCHAR,CACHAR
GR CASE NO: 1985/2009
U/S 392 of IPC
State
-Versus-
1. Md. Didarul Haque
2. Md. Amir uddin Laskar
...............Accused Persons
PRESENT : Smti Sorbani Bhattacharjee, AJS
Judicial magistrate, First Class
Silchar, Cachar
ADVOCATES APPEAREDFOR THE PROSECUTION
: Sri Dharmananda Deb
FOR THE ACCUSED
: Julhas uddin Laskar
EVIDENCE RECORDED ON
ARGUMENT HEARD ON
: 21/03/16, 26/05/16
: 26/09/2016
JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON : 26/09/2016
2|Page
JUDGMENT
1. The prosecution story in brief is that on 10/06/2009 at
about 1 a.m few unknown persons called the name of
the informant from the courtyard of his house stating
that they are the police personal’s of Bhangarpar police
outpost and they are thirsty. When he opened the door
then the miscreants entered in his house armed with
sharp weapons and threatened him to hand over Rs.
16,000/- which he received after selling a buffalo in the
Borjatrapur Bazar. The accused persons took away the
money and left the place of occurrence.
2. The Officer-in-charge, Borkhola police station, on receipt
of Ejahar registered Borkhola P.S. Case No.59/2009, U/S
380 of IPC and started investigation. After completion of
the investigation, the concerned I.O. submitted charge
sheet against accused persons Hussain Ahmed Laskar,
Didarul Haque and Amir uddin Laskar U/S 380 of IPC.
During the pendency of this case, the case against
Hussain ahmed Laskar was filed.
3. In due course, the accused persons appeared before
the Court and the copies of relevant documents were
furnished to them. Having found a prima facie case
against the accused persons U/S 392 of IPC, the charge
under the said section of law is framed which was read
over and explained to the accused persons to which
they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
4. Prosecution, in support of its case, examined five
witnesses. Defence case is of total denial as it is
revealed from the statement of the accused persons
3|Page
recorded U/S 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Defence side examined no witnesses. I have heard the
arguments advanced by the learned counsels of both
sides.
5. POINTS FOR DETERMINATION:(i) Whether the accused persons on 10.06.09 at about 1
a.m. committed theft of Rs. 16,000/- and in committing the
theft voluntarily caused or attempted to cause fear of
instant death or instant hurt and they were both present
there in front of the informant and his family members and
there by committed offence punishable U/S 392 of IPC?
DISCUSSION, DECISION AND REASONS THEREOF:
6. P.W.1 Monir uddin Laskar inter alia deposed that on the
day of occurrence at about 1 A.M. accused persons told
him that they are the staffs of Bhangarpar outpost and
they are thirsty and need waster. When he opened the
door then the accused persons entered in his house
and confined him in his house. The miscreants were
hiding their face with black cloth. On that day he got Rs
17,000/- by selling a buffalo at Laskar Bazar and he
kept the money in his house. The miscreants asked him
to give them the said money otherwise they will kill
him. They took away Rs. 17,000 from his trunk. He
further stated that they also took away Gold ornaments
of his children. The miscreants left the place of
occurrence taking the money and ornaments. On the
next day he lodged the case. He exhibited the FIR as
exhibit 1 and his signature on it as exhibit 1(1). During
his cross examinations PW 1 stated that he knew the
accused Amir and Didar as his neighbour. He could not
identify the accused persons. He did not receive back
the money and articles. He denied the suggestions put
4|Page
forward to him by the LD. Learned Counsel for the
accused.
7. The evidence of PW-2 Md. Moin uddin Laskar and PW4
Md. Fakaruddin Laskar reveals that they came to know
about the incident from the informant and they are not
the eye witnesses of this case. The evidence of PW-3
Rezia begum Laskar reveals that informant is her
husband and she does not know the accused persons.
She was sleeping at the time of the incident. The
miscreants came to her house and told them to open
the door. When her husband opened the door then
they entered in her house and confined him there.
They forcefully took away the money informant got
after selling the buffalo. During her cross examination
she stated that the miscreants were covering their face
with black clothes and she could not identify them. PW5 Md. Romiuddin Laskar was declared hostile to the
prosecution.
8. From the entire evidence on record, it appears that
apart from PW-1 none of the prosecution witnesses
have incriminated the accused persons with the alleged
offence. As per the version of PW-1 accused persons
told him that they are the staffs of Bhangarpar outpost
and they are thirsty and need waster. When he opened
the door then the accused persons entered in his house
and confined him in his house. The miscreants were
hiding their face with black cloth. On that day he got Rs
17,000/- by selling a buffalo at Laskar Bazar and he
kept the money in his house. The miscreants asked him
to give them the said money otherwise they will kill
him. They took away Rs. 17,000 from his trunk. He
further stated that they also took away Gold ornaments
of his children. During his cross examination he has
5|Page
himself admitted that he could not identify the accused
persons. PW-3 who is the another eye witness to the
alleged occurrence stated in her cross examination that
the miscreants were covering their face with black
clothes and she could not identify them. PW-2 and 4
are hearsay witness. PW-5 is declared hostile to the
prosecution case. In this case prosecution failed to
examine the other witnesses and the investigating
officer of this case. From the version of PW-1 and 3 it is
evident that the miscreants covered their face with
black clothes and they could not identify them. Thus, it
raises doubt as to the identity of the accused persons
as the miscreants or not. After going through the above
evidence on record, I am of the opinion that ingredients
of the offence U/S 392 of IPC has not been proved
against the accused persons beyond all reasonable
doubt and they are entitled to acquittal on benefit of
doubt.
ORDER
9. Accordingly, the accused persons Md. Didarul Haque and
Md. Amir Uddin Laskar are acquitted of the offence U/S
392 of IPC on benefit of doubt and they are set at liberty
forthwith. The bail bonds of the accused persons and their
surety(s) shall remain in force for a period of 6 months
from today as per amended CrPC.
Given under my hand and seal of this court on
this 26th day of September, 2016.
Smti Sorbani Bhattacharjee
Judicial Magistrate, First Class,
Silchar, Cachar
6|Page
GR.1985/2009
APPENDIX
PROSECUTION EXHIBITS:
1) EXHIBIT 1: Ejahar
2) EXHIBIT 1 (1):Signature
DEFENCE EXHIBITS
NIL.
PROSECUTION WITNESSES
1. Moniruddin Laskar
2. Md. Moin Uddin Laskar
3. Rijia Begum Laskar
4. Md. Fakar Uddin Laskar
5. Romij Uddin Laskar
DEFENCE WITNESSES
NONE
MATERIAL EXHIBITS
NIL
Smti Sorbani Bhattacharjee,
Judicial Magistrate, First Class
Silchar, Cachar