Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:16228 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 89 of 2024 1. Pawan Roy @ Pawan Kumar Roy. 2. Dilip Kumar Roy. 3. Baleshwar Prasad Roy. 4. Abhishek Kumar Roy. All R/o Vill- SarasaniP.O. & P.S.- Jasidih, Deoghar. --- --- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. Surendra Prasad Roy, S/o Late Nareshwar Roy, R/o R/o Vill- SarasaniP.O. & P.S.- Jasidih, Deoghar. --- --- Opposite Parties --- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --- For the Petitioners : Mr. Niranjan Kumar, Adv. For the O.P.s : None. --- 06/08.06.2026 Heard Mr. Niranjan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners. None appears on behalf of the State. This application has been preferred against the judgment dated 15.12.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Deoghar in connection with Criminal Appeal No. 34/2023 whereby and whereunder, the order dated 29.03.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Deoghar in connection with Jasidih P.S. Case No. 342/2017 convicting the petitioners for the offences under Section 447, 427/34 IPC and releasing them after due admonition in terms of Section 3 of Probation of Offenders Act has been affirmed. Submission has been advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners that the evidence of the witnesses has not been properly appreciated by the learned trial court. It has been submitted that the petitioners have been implicated only on account of the previous enmity and, in fact, even the doctor has not been examined which further dilutes the case of the prosecution. Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:16228 The allegations reveal that when the petitioners were breaking the wall of the informant, a protest was made as a result of which, the informant was assaulted by the petitioners. Based on the aforesaid allegations, Jasidih P.S. Case No. 342/2017 was instituted. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted and after cognizance was taken, the substance of accusation was explained to the petitioners for the offences under Section 341, 323, 504, 506, 427, 447/34 IPC. In course of trial, witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution and documents were also exhibited and the learned trial court vide judgment dated 29.03.2023 had convicted the petitioners for the offences under Section 447, 427/34 IPC and had released them after due admonition in terms of Section 3 of Probation of Offenders Act. Being aggrieved, the petitioners had approached the learned Sessions Judge, Deoghar in Criminal Appeal No. 34/2023 which, however, was dismissed vide order dated 15.12.2023 and which is the order impugned to the present revision application. The assault upon the informant on the part of the petitioners have been supported by the evidence of P.W.2 and P.W.3 who are the eye witnesses and the defence has failed to discredit their evidence. It also appears that so far as the angle of enmity which has been raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner has also been considered by the learned appellate court. Enmity is a double edged sword and it cannot be construed to mean that only on the basis of enmity the petitioners have been falsely implicated. The evidence of the witnesses discards such contention advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner with respect to his false implication. The learned trial court as well as the learned appellate court has appropriately considered the testimony of the witnesses as well as the documentary evidence while holding the petitioners guilty for the offences under Section 447 and 427/34 IPC. Neutral Citation 2026:JHHC:16228 Regard being had to the above, I do not find any reason to conclude otherwise and consequently, this revision application is disposed of. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) Dated- 08th June, 2026. Preet/- Uploaded on: 10 /06/2026.