PATNA HIGH COURT
P.S.Mishra and Abhiram Singh JJ.
Mahendra Banrait
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Application No. 1 of 1983 ; 2 of 1983 ; 9 of 1983 ; 10 of 1983 ; 24 of 1983 ; 29 of 1983 ;
Government Appeal No. 9 of 1983 ; 11 of 1983 ;
Decided On : MAY 05, 1987
CRIMINAL APPEAL - MURDER - SECTION 302 IPC - INJURIES ON ACCUSED - EXPLANATION - BURDEN OF PROOF - SECTION 161 CRPC - DELAY IN RECORDING STATEMENT - SECTION 304 PART II IPC - CULPABLE HOMICIDE NOT AMOUNTING TO MURDER - SECTION 323 IPC - VOLUNTARILY CAUSING HURT - SECTION 324 IPC - VOLUNTARILY CAUSING HURT BY DANGEROUS WEAPONS OR MEANS - SECTION 325 IPC - VOLUNTARILY CAUSING GRIEVOUS HURT - SECTION 147 IPC - RIOTING - SECTION 148 IPC - RIOTING, ARMED WITH DEADLY WEAPON - SECTION 149 IPC - EVERY MEMBER OF UNLAWFUL ASSEMBLY GUILTY OF OFFENCE COMMITTED IN PROSECUTION OF COMMON OBJECT - SUMMARY OF FACTS, FINDINGS, ISSUES, RATIO DECIDENDI AND FINAL DECISION.
Fact of the Case:
A dispute over a ridge between two plots of land led to a violent clash between two groups of villagers, resulting in the deaths of four persons and injuries to several others. The prosecution alleged that the accused persons, armed with lethal weapons, attacked the victims and caused their deaths. The defense, on the other hand, claimed that the victims were the aggressors and that the accused persons acted in self-defense.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had failed to establish the genesis and manner of the occurrence beyond reasonable doubt. It noted that the prosecution witnesses had acknowledged that the accused persons had sustained injuries at the time of the occurrence, but the prosecution had failed to explain these injuries. The court also found that the defense had not raised any plea of self-defense, and that the evidence suggested that the accused persons had been assaulted with deadly weapons.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had established the genesis and manner of the occurrence beyond reasonable doubt. 2. Whether the accused persons were entitled to the benefit of doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution had failed to establish the genesis and manner of the occurrence beyond reasonable doubt. It noted that the prosecution witnesses had acknowledged that the accused persons had sustained injuries at the time of the occurrence, but the prosecution had failed to explain these injuries. The court also found that the defense had not raised any plea of self-defense, and that the evidence suggested that the accused persons had been assaulted with deadly weapons. 2. The court held that the accused persons were entitled to the benefit of doubt.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeals of the convicted appellants and acquitted them of the charges against them. It also dismissed the government appeals for enhancement of sentence and acquittal. The appellants were discharged from the liability of their bail bonds.
Prabha Shanker Mishra, J.
1. Criminal appeals by the convicted persons and the two Government Appeals ; one against acquittal and the other for enhancement of sentence, arise out of a common judgment and raise contentions both of facts and law which overlap each other. They have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.
2. In an occurrence taking place on 25-12-1978 in village Usrahi, P. S. Jainagar, District Madhubani, 4 persons were killed and many other persons sustained injuries by lethal weapons. The occurrence took place at about 7 a. m. over a ridge between revisional survey plot Nos. 10425 and 10426. Plot No 10426, area 4 Kathas 2 Dhurs belonged to P. W. 22, Rajgir Gohiwar. He had grown sugarcane in the said field and the crop had been cut and removed by him before the occurrence. Survey Plot No. 10425 having an area of 10 Kathas belonged to Mahadeo Yadav (accused appellant) and he was in possession thereof. He had grown wheat in the eastern half of the said land and there were small plants of wheat present when the occurrence took place. He had also grown Tisi and Khesari plants in the other half. Another plot in the vicinity (plot No. 10424) belonged to Sonfi Yadav in which he bad grown sugarcane and yet another plot in the vicinity, plot No. 10456 belonged to Deolal Gohiwar who had grown Tisi and Khesari crops in his land. Plot Nos. 10425 and 10426 were divided by a ridge between them. A few days before the occurrence, according to the prosecution, some labourers of Mahadeo Yadav (appellant) had cut a small portion of the said ridge from the south. Ajablal Gohiwar who was the Mukhiya of the local Gram Panchayat, was informed by Rajgir Gohiwar (P. W. 22) about the cutting of the ridge at the instance of Mahadeo Yadav. The Mukhiya intervened and at his intervention the ridge was restored. On 25-12-1978 at about 7 a m. P. W. 2 Shubh Narayan Yadav learnt that Mahadeo had gone with a mob of 40-45 persons to demolish that ridge. He informed the Mukhiya and others about it. The Mukhiya, P. W. 2 and many other persons with them proceeded to the fields. While they were in the way, a mob of 40-45 persons with lethal weapons emerged from a sugarcane field (plot No. 10424). Ajablal and others, when they saw the mob, ran towards west to save themselves, but the mob chased them. When, however, Ajablal and others were in plot No. 10456 they were surrounded by the members of the mob and assaulted. According to the prosecution, appellant Ranikhelawan assaulted Rajdeo Gohiwar with a Farsa, appellant Mahendra Banrait assaulted Laxmi Thakur with a Farsa, appellant Rajendra Barnait assaulted Asarfit Gohiwar with a Farsa and Ajablal, who had fled further was assaulted in plot No. 10425 by appellants Uttim Banrait, Mahadeo Yadav and Matwar Yadav and others. Some other persons, who were with Ajablal and other victims, were also assaulted by the members of the mob.
3. After assaulting the Mukhiya and others the members of the mob fled away. According to the prosecution, besides Rajdeo Gohiwar, Laxmi Thakur and Asarfi Gohiwar and Mukhiya Ajablal, P. Ws. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 were also assaulted in the occurrence.
4. On a telephonic message that two parties at village Usrahi were ready to clash with each other and so there was an apprehension of the breach of the peace, the officer-in-charge of Jainagar Police Station (P. W. 17) made an entry in the Station Diary and proceeded with some other police officials to prevent breach of the peace. The police party reached at the village at 11.45 a. m. Rameshwar Thakur (P. W. 8) made statements about the occurrence and on his Fardbeyan (Ext. 14) P. W. 17 took up the investigation of the case and a formal F. I. R. was drawn up at the Jainagar Police Station. An Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police held inquest over the dead bodies of Laxmi Thakur, Rajdeo Gohiwar and Asarfi Gohiwar who were found kept on cots in the fields of Devlal Gohiwar bearing R. S. Plot No. 10456 and
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.