SUDARSHAN YADAV And ANR vs STATE OF JHARKHAND

Court
Jharkhand High Court

2026:JHHC:26441
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 479 of 2008
--------
1. Sudarshan Yadav, S/o Sattu Yadav,
2. Birbal Yadav, S/o Surat Yadav,
Both resident of village-Narayanpur, P.S.-Ramgarh, Dist.-Dumka
... ... Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand …… Respondent
--------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
--------
For the Appellants :Mrs. Shail Lakra, Amicus Curiae
For the State :Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Spl.P.P.
--------
J UDGMENT
nd
Dated: 02 September, 2026

1. Heard learned Amicus Curiae for the appellants and learned Spl.P.P.
for the State.
2. The instant criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and
th
order of conviction and sentence dated 18 March, 2008 passed in
th
Sessions Case No. 70 of 2004 by the learned 5 Addl. Sessions
Judge (F.T.C.), Dumka, whereby and whereunder, the appellants
have been convicted for the offence under Sections 324 and 448 of
the IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for one and half years
for the offence under Section 324 of the IPC and further R.I. for six
months for the offence under Sections 448 of the IPC. Both the
sentences were directed to run concurrently.
Factual Matrix
3. The factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that on 01.01.2003,
at about 09:00 AM, the informant had gone to Gardi Village to sell
sweet bread and returned at about 4:00 PM. Thereafter, one of the
accused persons namely Birbal called the informant and the
informant went to sit there where Birbal was sitting under the tree.

2026:JHHC:26441

Meanwhile, another accused Sudarshan who was already standing
there asked the informant as to why he assaulted the accused Birbal
and all of sudden, Sudarshan started to slap the informant. The
informant fled towards his house due to fear of assault of
Sudarshan, then, the accused persons followed the informant and
dragged the informant out from his house and assaulted with
Sabbal (Sharpened Iron Rod) and Lathi with intention to kill him
due to which, the informant sustained injury on forehead, feet and
back of the body. Hearing alarm, the co-villagers came and rescued
the informant who was brought to police station where F.I.R. was
lodged.
4. On the basis of written information of the informant, Ramgarh P.S.
Case No. 01 of 2003 was registered for the offence under Sections
341, 323, 324, 452, 307/34 of the IPC. After completion of
investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted against the accused
persons under the aforesaid sections and after taking cognizance,
the case was committed to the court of Sessions, where Sessions
Case No. 70 of 2004 was registered. The accused persons pleaded
not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. In course of trial, altogether eight witnesses were examined by
the prosecution apart from documentary evidence.
6. On the other hand, no oral or documentary evidence has been
adduced by the defence. The case of the defence is complete
denial from the occurrence and pleaded they have committed no
offence.
2
Cr. App. (S.J.) No. 479 of 2008


2026:JHHC:26441

Submissions on behalf of the appellants:-
7. Learned counsel for the appellants without touching the merits of
the judgment has confined his argument towards not extending the
benefit of Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act to the
appellants. He has submitted that appellants are entitled to be
released under Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act being the
first offenders. The learned trial Court has not recorded any
specific reason as to why the appellants are not entitled to get the
benefit of Probation of Offenders Act. Therefore, the present
appellants deserve benefit of Section 4 of Probation of Offenders
Act. Moreover, the alleged occurrence is of the year 2003 and the
appellants have maintained peace and have settled in their life
leading a normal life, hence, the appellants may be extended the
benefit of Section 4 of Probation of Offenders Act.
Submissions on behalf of the State
8. Learned Spl.P.P. has defended the judgment of learned trial Court
on merits but so far as extension of benefit of Probation of
Offenders Act is concerned, it is fairly admitted that it was the first
offence of the appellants, hence, appropriate order may be passed.
Analysis, reasons and decision

9. I have gone through the record of the case along with the
impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence in the
light of the contentions raised on behalf of both side.
10. It appears that the learned trial court has held the appellants guilty
for the offence under Sections 324 and 448 of the I.P.C. From
3
Cr. App. (S.J.) No. 479 of 2008


2026:JHHC:26441

perusal of evidence of prosecution witnesses including the injured
witness i.e. P.W.-5 informant along with his injury report which
was prepared by the Doctor (P.W.-8), it appears that the learned
trial Court has meticulously considered the evidences and has
rightly convicted the appellants which warrants no interference in
this appeal which is hereby affirmed on merits.
11. Considering the overall factual background, genesis, manner, place
and nature of offence committed by the appellants, their age,
character and antecedent, it appears expedient in the ends of justice
to extend the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act
of 1958, instead of awarding substantive sentence of imprisonment
as awarded by the learned trial court.
12. In view of the above, this appeal is dismissed on merits with
modification in sentence to the extent that instead of undergoing
substantive sentence of imprisonment awarded to the appellants by
learned Trial Court for the offence under Section 324 and 448 of
the I.P.C., the appellants are hereby directed to be released on
furnishing bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with
one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court
under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 within two
months from the date of this order for maintaining peace and be of
good behavior for one year from the date of furnishing the bond.
13. If the bond is not furnished within above stipulated time, the
learned trial Court shall issue notice upon the appellants to secure
their attendance for furnishing the bond.
4
Cr. App. (S.J.) No. 479 of 2008


2026:JHHC:26441

14. In case of violation of the terms and conditions of the bond, the
appellants shall be called upon to receive the sentence of
imprisonment already awarded to them by the learned trial Court.
15. Pending I.A.(s), if any, is also disposed of, accordingly.
16. Let a copy of this judgment along with Trial Court Record be sent
back to the court concerned immediately for information and
needful.
17. I take this opportunity to appreciate the assistance rendered by
Mrs. Shail Lakra, learned Amicus Curiae and direct the Member
Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee to extend the
stipulated fee as per notification of High Court Legal Services
Committee to learned Amicus Curiae, within a period of four
weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

18. Office is directed to ensure that a copy of this order is served
upon Member Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee.

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
02.09.2026
Basant/
Uploaded on 03/09/2026
5
Cr. App. (S.J.) No. 479 of 2008