Back
K.S.HEGDE, R.S.BACHAWAT
Mohan Rai, Bharath Rai – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent
Key Points: - The court examines whether the prosecution's reliance on Ex. III revolver is valid given ballistic evidence that empties and misfired cartridge could not have been fired from Ex. III (!) . - The appellate court scrutinizes the admissibility and probative value of Ex. 4 (Bharath Rai’s statement) and its impact under Section 162 and Faddi v. State, and whether it prejudiced the appellants (!) . - The court discusses issue-estoppel and res judicata in criminal proceedings, assessing whether the appellants can be bound by prior acquittals or prosecutions arising from related complaints (!) (!) (!) . - The High Court and Trial Court are found to have erred in rejecting the appellants’ defence as highly probable based on injuries and the lack of explanation by the prosecution (!) . - The court concludes there has been a miscarriage of justice and acquits the appellants, with bail bonds cancelled (!) .
Judgement
HEGDE, J. : - In these connected appeals by special leave the legality of the convictions of the appellants - appellant Mohan Rai under S. 324 of the Indian Penal Code and appellant Bharath Rai under S. 324/109 of the Indian Penal Code - is challenged. In the trial Court the former was convicted under S. 307 of the Indian Penal Code and the latter under S. 307/109 of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court of Patna, in appeal, altered their convictions as set out above.
2. In order to appreciate the contentions advanced on behalf of the appellants it is necessary to state briefly the prosecution as well as the defence version. The case made out by the prosecution is that because of previous enmity Mohan Rai shot and injured P. W. I Balli Ahir, at the instigation of Bharath Rai, on the evening of October 8 1961, in Natwar Bazar. The existence of enmity between the appellants and most of the prosecution witnesses who speak to the occurrence, is satisfactorily established. Many of the prosecution witnesses appear to have been proceeded against under S. 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure at the instance of the appellants. The plea of the appellants was that on the day of incid
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
