1985 Supreme(Pat) 23
HIGH COURT OF PATNA
P.S. MISHRA & S.H.S. ABIDI, JJ
Tamizuddin & Ors. – Appellant
Versus
State or Bihar – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 327 of 1979
Decided On: 17.1.1985
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants: M/s B.P. Samaiyar & A.K. Samaiyar.
For the State: Mr. G.P. Jaiswal.
For the Informant: Miss Kamlesh Jain.
Headnote:Indian Penal Code Section 99 & 100–Right of private defence does not merely extend to protection of ones own right but also of others. The person exercising that right must have the apprehension of death or grievous hurt. The circumstance must be such that there was a reasonable likely hood of causing of such injury–An accused who has no such apprehension exceeds the right of private defence and an injury caused by him falls u/s 304 Part 1.
(Para 11 to 15)
Criminal Trial–Evidence Act, Section 3–Injuries upon the accused–Injury report not proved by the doctor but by the I.O.–I.O. admitting in his evidence that he had no seen the doctor writing–Injury Report not admissible.
(Para 11)
S.H.S. ABIDI, J
1. The eleven appellant's alongwith five other accused persons who have been acquitted, have been tried by the learned fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Purnia in Sessions Trial No.95 of 1976. The appellant No.1 Tamizuddin has been convicted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been awarded sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life. The appellants no. 2 to 11 also have been convicted under section 302 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and ha ye been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. All the appellants have further been convicted under section 379 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. Further Appellants No.2, 3, 4, 5 and 11 have been convicted under section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each. Appellants No.6 to 10 have further been convicted under section 147 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for One year. Appellant No.6 has further been convicted under section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. Hence this appeal.
2. The case of the Prosecution was that on 20.8.1972 the informant, Hakimuddin, who is now dead and was not examined as a witness, went to harvest the paddy crop in his field being khata No.51 in the eastern Bahiyar along with Fazluddin. Alim, Sarfuddin and others. After cutting the crop Usman was carrying the harvested paddy crop on the bullock cart. At about 10.00 A.M. ten persons from the north and ten persons from the south came armed with bows and arrows and started showering arrows. The informant and his men fled towards their houses. When they reached near the Bari of Safique Thasildar, appellant no. 2 started shooting his arrow, Tamijuddin, appellant No.1 shot arrow in the chest of Usman who fled towards east after leaving the cart and then Safique Thasildar shot an arrow in the back of Usman and he fell down near the Bamboo clump and died immediately. From the arrows of other accused, Sarfuddin Fazluddin and others were also injured. The accused ran away with the looted cart. Sarju Soren and Shibu Soren bad been identified in the mob which had come from the north, while Banu Soren was identified in the mob coming from the south. The occurrence was seen by Lalchand, Samiruddin. Md. Safique Amin, Kafil, Tahir and others. The Police of Kishungauj Police Station and the Magistrate on getting the information about the occurrence reached the village with Police party and a Magistrate. Sri B.L. Das (P.W.12). They came to the village and when they reached near the house of Safique Thasildar they found some persons who at the sight of the police fled. The cart loaded with the paddy was seized. Three persons were apprehended with bows and arrows.
3. A Fardbeyan of Hakimuddin was recorded at the spot at about 1.00 P.M. on the same day. The signature of the informant Hakimuddin was Exhibit 1 and also signed by Kafiluddin which is Exhibit-1/1. On the basis of the Fardbeyan, first information report. Exhibit-7 was registered and investigation started.
4. The case was investigated by Ramanand Singh. P.W.13, who prepared the inquest report (Exhibit-8). He went to the spot and found track of bullock cart to the west of the harvested crop and he also found blood at two places and also signs of fall of man on the grass. He also found blood on the southern side of the road about one hundred foot east and prepared seizure list which is Exhibit.5/6. He however, did not prepare any map. After completing his investigation he submitted charge sheet against the accused. The postmortem on the dead body of Usman was conducted by doctor Nasib Lal Jha (P.W.2) on 21.8.1972 at about 5.00 P.M. at Kishunganj and post mortem report is Exbibit-2. He did not find injury on the back t