MD. MONIR ALAM versus STATE OF BIHAR

Citation: [2009] 16 S.C.R. 522 · Decided: 19-11-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: H.S. BEDI, B.S. CHAUHAN · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009) 16 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 522 
A 
MD. MONIR ALAM 
V. 
STATE OF BIHAR 
(Criminal Appeal No.133 of 2003) 
B 
NOVEMBER 19, 2009 
[HARJIT SINGH BEDI AND DR. 8.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.] 
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958: 
t, 
c 
s.4 - Release of offender on probation of good conduct 
- Conviction of offender by trial court along with others ulss 
304 (part-II) and 323 /PC with a sentence of three years 
observing that the incident was in fact a free fight - High Court 
modifying the conviction to one uls 304 (part-11)1149 and s.323 
D /PC -
Held: Offender has secured a Doctorate and 
employment as a Senior Assistant Professor -
His 
Jo " 
professional qualifications show his expertise in his specialty 
and also portray his association with prestigious organisations 
worldwide in the field of strategic studies - His conduct and 
E attainment after his involvement in the matter justify his 
release on probation - He shall be released on probation u/ 
s 4 of the Act on the terms settled by trial court- Penal Code, 
1860 - ss.304 (part-11)1149 and 323. 
> 
CRIMINAL AP PELLA TE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal 
; 
F No. 133 of 2003. 
From the Judgment & Order dated 2.5.2002 of the High 
Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Appeal No. 84 of 
1999(S) (J). 
G 
R.S. Suri, Azim H. Laskar, Abhijit Sengupta and Bikas Kar 
Gupta for the Appellant. 
< 
. Ritesh Kumar Chauhary, Gopal Singh, Manish Kumar and 
Anuj Prakash for the Respondent. 
H 
522 
MD. MONIR ALAM v. STATE OF BIHAR 
523 
The following Order of the Court was delivered 
ORDER 
1. This appeal by way of special leave arises out of the 
following facts: 
2. At about 3 P.M. on 26th of February 1992, a 
.J demarcation of the land between the deceased lmteyaj Ali and 
Manjoor Alam, the uncle of the appellant was being conducted 
A 
B 
by the Revenue Amin. During the course of the demarcation, it 
transpired that the house belonging to Manjoor Alam had fallen 
C 
in the portion falling to the deceased, lmteyaz Ali. As the Amin 
proceeded to fix the pillars demarcating the land, a protest was 
raised by Manjoor, and he attempted to interfere in the 
proc~edings. lmteyaz Ali, however, intervened and requested 
this relatives to allow the Revenue Officials to fix the pillars. This 
D 
led to an quarrel between the parties during which Manjoor Ali, 
Kammurddin, Monir Alam and several others caught hold of 
lmteyaz and on Kammurddin's exhortation assaulted with a 
lathi. lmteyaz fell down to the ground whereafter Manjoor and 
Monir Alam again assaulted him and when Md.Tufel, Fatma 
E 
Khatoon and Ajmeri Nisa came to intervene in favour of lmteyaz, 
they too were assaulted. The parties were, however, separated 
by the intervention of the Amir and other Officials and also the 
, 
~·Police Havildar who too was present to oversee the 
demarcation. lmteyaz and the other injured persons were 
carried to Barauli Hospital from where lmteyaz was referred to 
F 
Gopalganj and yet further to Patna where he succumbed to his 
injuries. The defence of the accused was that during the course 
of the demarcation in which the police Havildar was also 
present, it was the complainant party who nad attacked them 
with lathi etc. and injuries were caused to them by lmteyaz, 
G 
·1 ,Sahnawaj and others with lathis. A cross-case was accordingly 
registered against the other set of accused as well. The trial 
court, however, in the present matter, acquitted all the accused 
on the charge of murder but convicted them under Section 
H 
524 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009) 16 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 
A 304(11) and 323 of the IPC and sentenced them to various terms 
of imprisonment with the appellant Monir Alam being awarded 
a sentence of three years on the premise that the incident was 
in fact a free fight between the two parties. The matter was 
taken in appeal by Monir Alam to the High Court. The High 
s Court modified the conviction from one under Section 304(11) 
and 323 simplicitor to one under Section 304(11)/149 of the IPC 
and 323 of the IPC and also took up the revision filed by the 
complainant against the acquittal of three of the accused, 
namely Nisar, Uudus and Kummaruddin. The High Court held 
c that the acquittal of some of the accused was not justified but 
refused to interfere in revision on the ground that the 
proceedings had gone on for several years. The High Court 
therefore in effect confirmed the judgment of the trial court. The 
present appeal has been filed only by Md.Monir Alam who has 
0 been awarded

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.