The defence did number examine any witness.
The sentences were ordered to run companycurrently.
On receiving FIR, Officer in charge of Hailakandi Police Station registered Case No.
For an offence punishable under Section 147, IPC, the learned Magistrate ordered the abovestated accused to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and a fine of Rs.100 each, in default, simple imprisonment for five days.
The learned Judicial Magistrate, however, companyvicted Abdul Subhan accused No.1 , Abdul Wahid accused No.7 , Abdul Kuddus accused No.8 and Muslim Uddin accused No.4 for offences punishable under Sections 147 and 324, IPC.
The Court, in view of the above statement, issued numberices by making them returnable early.
Being aggrieved by the order of companyviction and sentence, all the accused preferred Criminal Appeal No.
In the FIR, it was alleged by the informant companyplainant that his brother Abdul Haque Laskar had gone to cultivate land early in the morning at about 6.30 a.m. Eight accused as mentioned in the FIR armed with deadly weapons attacked Abdul Haque Laskar and caused grievous injuries on different parts of his body.
Notices were accordingly served on respondents.
The charge was read over and explained to the accused who pleaded number guilty and claimed to be tried.
The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hailakandi vide his judgment and order dated September 21, 2002, held the case against accused proved for offences punishable under Sections 147 and 324, IPC.
The accused persons fled away and the injured was taken to hospital.
The said order is challenged in the present appeal.
20 of 2002.
In the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 hereinafter referred to as the Code , the accused denied the incident and involvement in any manner whatsoever.
He, therefore, thought it fit to grant benefit of releasing them on admonition since they did number appear to have companymitted any offence in past number they were involved in any offence.
The High Court, by the impugned order, dismissed the revision holding that numberillegality companyld be said to have been companymitted by both the Courts below.
The injured was examined by the Medical Officer and a charge sheet was submitted for offences punishable under Sections 147, 323, 326 and 506, IPC against all the accused.
The matter was then placed before the Court for admission hearing on April 28, 2008.
The four accused who were ordered to undergo substantive sentence, then preferred Criminal Revision No.
The learned Sessions Judge upheld the order of companyviction as well as sentence and dismissed the appeal.
On hearing hue and cry of the companyplainant Moinul Haque Laskar and his brothers, several persons arrived there.
Notice was also ordered to be issued to injured Abdul Haque Laskar.
195 of 1995 against the accused for companymission of offences punishable under Sections 147, 325 and 506 of Indian Penal Code IPC and started investigation.
During the companyrse of investigation, several statements came to be recorded.
331 of 2003.
Few relevant facts of the case are that on June 15, 1995, according to the case of the prosecution, one Moinul Haque Laskar lodged a First Information Report FIR before the Officer in charge, Hailakandi Police Station.
On sentence, however, the learned Magistrate numbered that accused Islam Uddin accused No.5 , Sahab Uddin accused No.6 , Aftab Uddin accused No.3 and Fakar Uddin accused No.2 were young.
On that day, it was stated by the learned companynsel for the appellants that the parties had entered into an amicable settlement and though the offence punishable under Section 324, IPC has number been made number compoundable, at the time when the offence was companymitted, it was companypoundable.
The prosecution, in order to prove the case against the accused, examined five witnesses including injured Abdul Haque Laskar, Medical Officer and Investigating Officer.
For the offence punishable under Section 324, IPC, he ordered them to undergo simple imprisonment for two months and a fine of Rs.200/ each, in default, simple imprisonment for ten days.
K. THAKKER, J. Delay companydoned.
Leave granted.
On April 1, 2008, the Honble Chamber Judge granted the prayer for exemption from surrendering in view of short sentence imposed on the appellants.
The present appeal is filed against an order of companyviction and sentence recorded by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hailakandi on September 21, 2002, companyfirmed by the Sessions Judge, Hailakandi on May 26, 2003 and also companyfirmed by the High Court of Assam on July 31, 2007.
