IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI, J.
Sanjay Kumar Thakur – Petitioner
Versus
State of Bihar – Opposite Parties
Criminal Revision No. 956 of 2002
Decided On : 24.7.2015
ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI, J.
1. Instant revision has been filed by the petitioner/complainant against an order dated 09.08.2002 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in Complaint Case No. 1109 of 2000 dismissing the complaint petition under Section 203 of the Cr. P.C.
2. For better appreciation, the facts of the case in brief are as follows:-
Showing the date of occurrence as 14.04.2000 a complaint petition was filed on 03.06.2000 against altogether fourteen accused persons out of whom accused no. 1 happens to be Officer-in-charge of Aurai Police Station while accused no. 2 to 4 ASI of Aurai Police Station, accused no. 5 Hawaldar of Aurai Police Station, accused no. 6 to 14 Constable of Aurai Police Station. With a further detail that complainant Sanjay Kumar Thakur happens to be elder cousin brother of Sunil Kumar of village-Bakhara who, on account of death of his father shifted to village-Babhangama, P.S.-Aurai under the guardianship of his Nana. It has also been disclosed that on 14.04.2000 complainant and Sunil Kumar had gone to village Sahi Meenapur to the place of one Om Prakash Sharma @ Ramprevesh Sahi for the marriage negotiation relating to Sunil's sister. At about 11:00 AM Sunil Kumar had gone to betel shop of Amrit Sah to purchase Gutaka' wherefrom Sunil Kumar and one Manoj were picked up by the police and were forced to sit in a Government jeep occupied by the accused persons, where they were assaulted and then jeep was driven away.
Then thereafter it has been alleged that all the accused persons came over two jeeps and one motorcycle and made house trespass belonging to Rampravesh Sahi, Amrit Sah, Sitaram Sahni and also assaulted the family members during course thereof, whereupon the villagers assembled out of whom Guddu was picked up by the police and was taken away.
No sooner than, they heard sound of firing and further Sunil, Guddu and Manoj sustained injuries and in the same condition were taken to Aurai Police Station.
It has further been alleged that all the three namely Sunil Kumar, Manoj Kumar Suman, Satendra Kumar Sahi @ Guddu were killed by the police personnel and further, the police in order to save themselves from the charges of committing murder knowingly and intentionally prepared a false and incorrect document by drawing a false case in the pen of accused no. 1 Uday Kumar, Officer-in-charge Aurai Police Station on 14.04.2000 at 13:25 hours hatching a story that criminals have assembled for preparation to commit dacoity regarding which they got confidential information whereupon the police party arrived at Shahi Meenapur at 11:00 AM. After appearance, they have seen two motorcycle parked near which few persons were also seen who, seeing the police ran away. Police warned and further, instructed to stop instead thereof, they began to fire upon the police party. Even then, police party asked them to surrender as well as to stop firing however continued whereupon, apprehending danger to their life and property, S.I., Uday Kumar ordered for firing and on account thereof, police party fired from revolver as well as rifle. Criminals took position from a maize field and continued firing at police personnel which was retaliated. After sometime criminals stopped firing. Thereafter, police gone in search and found three dead bodies having firearm injuries and were identified as Satyendra Kumar @ Guddu, Sunil Kumar and one unknown which was subsequently identified as Manoj Kumar. Firearms and ammunitions were found and accordingly, seized.
3. It has further been averred that aforesaid three persons were intentionally murdered on account of political pressure and for that, a false story has been woven by the police. It has also been pleaded in para-11 that now it has to be seen in which manner deceased were murdered and then thereafter from para-12 to 19, petitioner /complainant had detailed the circumstances justifying the complaint petition and further divulging the fact that all three de
Om Prakash vs. State of Jharkhand & Another
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.