Dukhharan Bhagat And Ors vs The State Of Jharkhand
- Court
- Jharkhand High Court
2026:JHHC:26357
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 885 of 2017
------
1. Dukhharan Bhagat, S/o Late Sukhharan Bhagat.
2. Illias Kerketta, S/o Jowakim Kerketta.
Both resident of Village – Patura.
3. Etwa Sahu, S/o Late Budhwa Sahu.
Resident of Village – Patura, Deepatoli,
All P.O. & P.S. – Basia, District – Gumla.
.... …. Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... .... Opp. Party
------
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Mohit Prakash, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, Spl.P.P.
------
JUDGMENT
st
Dated- 31 August, 2026
By Court: Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. appearing for the State.
2. The instant criminal revision is directed against the
judgment dated 05.06.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Simdega in Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 2015, whereby and
whereunder the appeal filed by the petitioners has been dismissed
and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated
st
25.06.2015 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1 Class,
Simdega in G.R. No. 33 of 2014 / T.R. No. 112 of 2015, whereby
the learned trial court has found the petitioners guilty for the
offence punishable under Sections 379, 414/120(B) of the I.P.C.
and Section 33 & 42 of the Indian Forest Act and sentenced to
1
2026:JHHC:26357
undergo R.I. for two years under Section 379/120 (B) of the I.P.C.,
R.I. for two years under Section 414/120 (B) of the I.P.C., R.I. for
one year under Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act and R.I. for one
year under Section 42 of the Indian Forest Act.
3. Factual matrix giving rise to this revision is that the
informant Brij Kumar (O/c Kolebira P.S.) reported to the P.S.
through his self-statement that on 24.1.2014, he was returning
from Simdega after attending the meeting of Lok Sabha Election
2014. He received information that illegal wood is being carried
away towards Bano in a Truck (6 wheels) while at
Chhagarbandha. On receiving the information, he along with the
armed forces Atal Guria, Shivnath Oraon, Dandu Rai Munda and
Ajay Oraon proceeded towards the place where such information
has indicated. When they reached near Bano road, they saw a
Truck covered with 'Tirpal' being driven at a heavy speed towards
Bano. This Truck was chased and indication have been made to
stop it. But their indication has not been given attention. However,
the truck was stopped at Ambatoli Mor and 3-4 persons ridded
over the Truck started running towards the forest. They have been
chased and three persons have been apprehended and one person
have successfully escaped. The apprehended persons revealed
their names as Dukh Haran Bhagat, Alias Kerketta and Etwa Sahu.
They revealed their name as labourer and stated about the
2
2026:JHHC:26357
absconding person as Jainul. They informed about the loaded
goods as Sakhua wood, which is being cut from Banderchuan and
being carried in the timber of Tulsi Patel at Longa. Due to absence
of independent witnesses at such lonely place, search have been
made in presence of witness Atal Guria and Shivnath Oraon to the
Truck bearing registration No. C.G.-04ZC-4326. It was found that
total 55 wooden logs were found on the Truck. The apprehended
persons revealed that Suresh Singh have got the wood cut at
Banderchuan. They also stated about death of the Truck owner
and caretaker of the Truck owner as Matias Lakra. They revealed
that Suresh is the contractor of the wood and they used to send the
wood in the Timber of Tulsi Patel. Due to non-submission of the
papers pertaining to the wood, truck have been seized and seizure
list is prepared and the copy of the seizure list has been handed
over to the accused persons.
4. On the basis of above information, FIR being Kolebira P.S.
Case No. 05 of 2014 was registered against the accused persons for
the offence under Sections 379/414 of the I.P.C. and Section 33 /
42 of the Indian Forst Act and after completion of investigation,
charge sheet was submitted, cognizance was taken
and charge was framed on 20.06.2014 against the accused persons
for the offence punishable under Sections 379/120B and 414/120B
of the I.P.C. and Section 33 / 42 of the Indian Forst Act which was
3
2026:JHHC:26357
read over and explained to them, to which, they pleaded not
guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. In the course of trial, altogether 08 witnesses were examined
by the prosecution. Apart from oral evidence, following
documentary evidence were also adduced:-
Exhibit- 1 : Signature of Atal Guria on Seizure List.
Exhibit-1/1 : Signature of police Shivnath Oraon.
Exhibit-1/2 : Seizure List.
Exhibit-2 : Self Written Statement of Brij Kumar.
Exhibit-3 : Formal F.I.R.
6. After conclusion of prosecution evidence, statements of
accused persons under Section 313 were recorded, in which the
accused persons have denied about the evidences put before them
and claimed themselves to be the innocent persons.
7. After conclusion of trial, the learned trial court found and
held the petitioners guilty for the offence under Sections 379,
414/120(B) of the I.P.C. and Section 33 & 42 of the Indian Forest
Act and sentenced, as stated above.
8. The aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence
passed by learned Trial Court was challenged by the petitioners in
Criminal Appeal No. 32/2015 before the learned Additional
4
2026:JHHC:26357
Sessions Judge, Simdega, but the same has been dismissed, which
has been assailed in this revision.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that
petitioners are neither owner nor driver or cleaner of the vehicle
involved in this case, which was seized, loaded with 55 Pieces of
Wooden Logs on the truck bearing registration no. CG-04ZC-4326.
Admittedly, the petitioners have been found labourers and have
no concern with the alleged wooden logs, having no knowledge
from where the wooden logs were collected and loaded. The
petitioners were apprehended while standing near the offending
truck at the instance of the concerned Officer-in-Charge, who was
member of the raiding party. The main culprits involved in
transporting the illegal forest wooden logs i.e., owner of the
vehicle, driver and cleaner have not been made accused in this
case and the poor labourers have been charge sheeted by the
police. The petitioners have been held guilty with aid of Section
120B of the I.P.C., but no material has been brought on record to
prove any conspiracy in between the petitioners and owner of the
vehicle or the dealer of the woods. Therefore, both the trial court
as well as appellate court has committed serious illegality while
appreciating the evidence available against the petitioners. It is a
case of no evidence at all against the petitioners constituting the
offence under Sections 379 and 414 and Section 120B of the I.P.C.
5
2026:JHHC:26357
and Section 33 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act. Therefore, the
petitioners deserve acquittal from the charges levelled against
them by setting aside the impugned judgments and order of
conviction and sentence.
10. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the
contention raised on behalf of the petitioners and submitted that
there is concurrent finding about guilt of the petitioners for the
offence under Sections 379 and 414 read with Section 120B of the
I.P.C. and Section 33 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act. The
involvement of the petitioners as labourer on loading or
unloading the wooden logs illegally collected from forest region
also shows their culpability. Therefore, there is no reason to
interfere with the concurrent findings recorded by the learned trial
court as well as learned appellate court. This revision has no
merits and is fit to be dismissed.
11. I have given anxious consideration to the rival contentions
of the parties and also perused the impugned judgments and
order along with other materials available on record.
12. From perusal of the evidence available on record, it appears
that it is admitted fact, as stated by P.W.-3 Ajay Oraon and P.W. -5
Brij Kumar that petitioners were apprehended while standing
near the offending truck, loaded with illegal wooden logs for the
purpose of black-marketing. The prosecution witnesses have
6
2026:JHHC:26357
categorically stated that the petitioners were labourers in the
truck. The driver and khalasi managed to flee away seeing the
police personnel. It further appears that the owner of the vehicle,
who might be a prime accused has not been prosecuted. The
driver of the vehicle, who was also involved in transporting the
illegal woods, has also not been prosecuted. The mere labourers
have been made escape goat of circumstances at the instance of
police. There is no iota of evidence constituting the offence under
Section 120B of the I.P.C. with the aid of which, the petitioners
have been held guilty. It appears that the learned trial court as
well as learned appellate court have committed serious illegality
and passed perverse judgment and recorded the finding of guilt of
the petitioners.
In view of aforesaid discussion and reasons, I find that both
13.
learned trial court as well as learned appellate court
have committed serious error of law in appreciating the evidence
available on record and in passing the impugned judgment.
Therefore, I find legal substance in the points of argument raised on
behalf of the petitioners and merits in this revision. Accordingly, the
impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence of the
petitioners passed by the learned trial court and upheld by the
appellate court is hereby set aside and this revision is allowed .
14. Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of.
7
2026:JHHC:26357
15. Petitioners are on bail. As such, they shall be discharged from
the liability of bail bond and sureties shall also be discharged.
16. Let a copy of this judgment along with trial court record be
sent to the court concerned for information and needful.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi
Dated : 31/08/2026
Sunil/- NAFR
Uploaded On 02/09/2026
8