Back
[2012 (2) East Cr C 364 (Pat)]
PATNA HIGH COURT
NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH AND ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH, JJ.
Baliram Prasasd & Anr. - Appellants (in Cr. App. No. 364/89)
With
Jagdish Prasad - Appellant (in Cr. App. No. 438/89)
Versus
State of Bihar Respondent (in both cases)
Cri. Appeal (DB) No. 364 of 1989 with Cri. Appeal (DB) No. 438 of 1989,
Decided on: November I7, 2011.
Indian Penal Code - Offences - Section 302, Section 307, Arms Act - The judgment discusses the prosecution's case, evidence, and discrepancies in the statements of witnesses. It highlights the concealment of material evidence, inconsistencies in the prosecution's story, and the incompatibility of the alleged manner of occurrence with the facts found. The court concludes that the prosecution has failed to prove its case, leading to the acquittal of the appellants.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves appeals arising from a judgment convicting individuals for offences under Section 302 and Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution's case revolves around an incident of indiscriminate firing during a kabaddi game, resulting in injuries and death. The judgment discusses discrepancies in witness statements, concealment of material evidence, and inconsistencies in the prosecution's story.
Finding of the Court:
The court finds that the prosecution has failed to prove its case. It highlights discrepancies in witness statements, concealment of material evidence, and inconsistencies in the prosecution's story. The court concludes that the manner of occurrence alleged by the prosecution is incompatible with the facts found, leading to the acquittal of the appellants.
Issues: The issues revolve around the credibility of witness statements, the authenticity of the prosecution's story, and the concealment of material evidence. The court addresses discrepancies in the statements of witnesses, the delay in dispatching the first information report, and the absence of essential witnesses.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision is based on the failure of the prosecution to prove its case. It emphasizes discrepancies in witness statements, concealment of material evidence, and inconsistencies in the prosecution's story. The court also highlights the incompatibility of the alleged manner of occurrence with the facts found.
Final Decision: The court allows the appeals, sets aside the judgments of convictions, and frees the appellants from the liabilities of their bail bonds, leading to their acquittal.
Per Navaniti Prasad Singh, J. 1. These two appeals arise from the judgment dated 27.07.1989 passed by Additional Sessions Judge IV, Nalanda at Biharsharif in Sessions Trial No 377 of 1986/8 of 1989. Cr Appeal No 438 of 1989 has been preferred by Jagdish Prasad who, by the said judgment, has been held guilty of offence under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life. Cr Appeal No 364 of 1989 has been preferred by Baliram Prasad and Nityanand Sharma, who have been held guilty by the said judgment for an offence punishable under Section 307. IPC and have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years each. It may be noticed here itself that altogether nine persons were put on trial but only the three aforesaid persons have been found guilty of various offences, as noted above. The rest have been acquitted on the same set of evidence.
2. It appears from the records of these cases that when Cr Appeal No 438 of 1989 was admitted, informant had appeared through his counsel, When these appeals were taken up for final hearing by this Court, learned counsel, who had entered appearance on behalf of the informant, submitted that he has no instructions from the informant to appear and oppose the appeals. We have heard Shri Shakil Ahmad Khan, learned Senior Counsel in support of the two appeals and Miss Shashi Bala Verma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State at length and perused the records.
3. The prosecution case starts from the fardbayan (Exhibit-9) of one Kedar Singh of village- Markatta in the distrtct of Nalanda who is PW 9. The said fardbayan is recorded on Friday (21.06.1985) at State Dispensary, Giriak. It is in the handwriting of Shri K N Choudhary of Giriak Police Station who has been examined as PW 14 and is the Investigating Officer (IO) as well. The informant (PW 9) has stated in the First Information Report (FIR) that Kishori Singh (the deceased), Umesh Singh (PW 4), Baikunth Singh (not examined), Ram Swaroop Singh (not examined), Ram Jee Singh (PW 5), another Baikunth Singh (PW 2), Ganauri Singh (PW 3), Vijay Singh (PW 6), Tapeshwar Singh, one of the injured (PW 8), Ram Sagar Singh, another injured (PW 7) and Yogendra Sharma (PW 1) were playing kabaddi near the village-Markatta, PS-Giriak, distrtct-Nalanda in the field of Juran Singh. This was being witnessed by Kedar Singh, the informant (PW 9) and several other persons of the village. It is alleged that all of a sudden, appellants Jagdish Prasad, Nityanand Sharma, Baliram Prasad and several others alongwith Jay Nandan Prasad, Dukh Haran Prasad, Sadhu Sharan Yadav, Ajit Prasad @ Chotey Prasad, Lalan Thakur, all armed with firearms (each has been ascribed either a gun or a rifle or a countrymade gun specifically) turned up and upon order of Jagdish Prasad, who initiated the firing, all started indiscriminate filing on the people playing kabaddi, Jagdish Prasad fired single fire from his rifle injuring Kishori Singh on the head who fell down unconscious. In this indiscriminate filing, Tapeshwar Singh and Ram Sagar Singh were injured. Tapeshwar Singh fell unconscious profusely bleeding.
Hearing the firing, villagers from Markatta arrived and the accused persons managed to escape. The motive for this incident was ascribed to the fact that there had been a serious difference between the villagers of village-Markatta where the incident took place and the villagers of village-Tarokhar, the neighbouring village with regard to construction of a road. The road having been constructed as per the desire of people of village-Markatta, the people of village Tarokhar had umbrage against them.
4. Injured were all brought to the State Dispensary at Giriak but on way, Kishori Singh died. Tapeshwar Singh was unconscious. At the State Dispensary, the doctor referred Tapeshwar Singh and Ram Sagar Singh for treatment to Biharsharif Sadar Hospital. It is here at Giriak that this fardbayan is recorded at 8 pm
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
