Details - Dhemaji

IN THE COURT OF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE 2 ND CLASS DHEMAJI.
PRESENT: K .BORAH, JM 2 nd Class
GR CASE No 644/2011(DMJ)
U/S 448/323/354 IPC
STATE
VS
For the prosecution : Mr. D Taye, Addl PP
For the defence: Mr. L Sakia, Advocate
Evidence recorded on 4.5.2012
Argument heard on 4.5.2012
Judgment delivered on 4.5.2012
SRI SUBHASH BURAGOHAIN
JUDGMENT
The prosecution case in brief is that on 28.8.2011 the complainant Sri
Mukesh Prasad s/o Lt Banarashi Prasad, r/o Ramnagar Dhemaji Ward No 3 under Dhemaji
PS lodged an ejahar alleging that on27.8.2011 at about 8pm the accused person Subhash
Buragohain along with two other persons entered into the house of the complainant and
without any reason beat the complainant, his wife and his son and injuring all three of them.
The Dhemaji PS on receiving this ejahar registered Dhemaji PS Case
No 256/2011 u/s 448/325/323/354/34 IPC and started investigation of the same. At the
completion of the investigation police submitted charge sheet in this case u/s 448/323/354

IPC against the accused person. Cognizance was taken under the above mentioned sections of
IPC and the accused person was summoned to face trial in this case. Accordingly the accused
person appeared in Court and he was allowed to go on bail. Copies of the relevant documents
were furnished to him and the substance of the offences u/s 448/323/354 of I.P.C were
explained to him under the relevant provisions of Sec 207 of Cr.P.C to which the accused
person pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Accordingly the Court proceeded with the
trial.
The prosecution examined three witnesses in this case. After
examination of these three witnesses the prosecution declined to examine the other witnesses.
The defence adduced no evidence on their part and their case was of complete denial.
POINTS FOR DETERMINATION
1. Whether the accused person entered into the compound of the complainant with an
intention to commit an offence and thus committed an offence u/s 448 IPC
2. Whether the accused person had voluntarily caused hurt to the complainant, his wife and
son and thus committed an offence u/s 323 IPC
3. Whether the accused person had used criminal force with the intent to outrage the
modesty of the wife of the complainant and thus committed an offence u/s 354 IPC
Discussions and reasons there of:
In this case the complainant was examined as PW1 and in his evidence
he stated that the incident took place five months ago. It was about 7/8 pm in the evening and
this PW was in his house at that time. There was a hulla on the road and there were four or
five people at that time. As stated in his cross examination he gave the ejahar on suspicion.
PW2, in her statement has stated that there were lot of people gathered on the road at that
time and they were quarrelling. In her evidence, PW3 stated that the incident occurred during

night time at about 8pm. She heard a hulla but when she went to see what had happened she
did not see anything.
After perusing the evidence on record it is seen that the complainant in
this case has stated something completely different from his ejahar version. He has clearly
stated in his cross examination that he gave the ejahar on suspicion and nowhere has he stated
that the accused person had assaulted him, his wife or his son. Thus PW1 being the person
who had actually lodged the ejahar making allegations against the accused person has
ultimately stated nothing against the accused person and therefore no incriminating materials
can be attributed against the accused person under the offences in this case.
In view of the above discussions it can be said that the offences under
sections 448/323/354 IPC have not been established against the accused person namely Sri
Subhash Buragohain by the prosecution and hence he is acquitted of the offences under
sections 448/323/354 IPC and set at liberty.
Given under my hand and seal on this 4 th day of May 2012.