NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH, J.:–This appeal was originally filed by six appellants against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi in Sessions Trial No. 256 of 1988 convicting them on 25.02.1991 under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.

2. Mr. Barun Kumar Choudhary, learned counsel appearing in support of the appeal, has stated that so far as appellant no. 5 Saryug Sah and appellant no.6 Baldeo Sah are concerned, they have died during the pendency of the appeal and as such the appeal in relation to them has abated. Accordingly, this appeal in relation to appellants no. 5 and 6 is held to have abated.

3. The prosecution case is based on the fardbeyan of P.W.9 Sushila Devi (the young daughter of the deceased Jagtaran Devi). The fardbeyan is Ext.4, which is said to have been recorded at 1A.M. on 30.04.1988 by the Investigating Officer (P.W.12), on the basis whereof the formal first information report was registered allegedly at 3A.M. on the same day. In the fardbeyan, P.W. 9 Sushila Devi states that while she was sleeping in her house in one of the rooms, her younger sist

Click Here to Read the rest of this document