ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI, J.:–Appellant, Boxing Rai @ Ramakant Rai has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 307 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs.5,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo S.I. for six months, under Section 326 of the I.P.C. sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years as well as to pay fine of Rs.25,000/-, in default thereof, to undergo S.I. for six months, under Section 448 of I.P.C. sentenced to undergo S.I. for one year with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently vide judgment of conviction dated 27.03.2015 and order of sentence dated 31.03.2015 passed by the 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in Sessions Trial No.425 of 2001.

2. Renu Devi (PW-9) gave her fard-bayan on 31.07.2000 while she was admitted at S.K.M.C.H., Muzaffarpur disclosing therein that for the present, she happens to be at her Naihar lying at village-Koili, P.S.-Meenapur. After meal, she slept at the verandah in the courtyard on 29.07.2000. Her mother was also sleeping there. Her husband works at Amritsar. Approximately, at 2.00 a.m., she felt inflammation whereupon awake and then, saw Boxing Rai @ Ramakant Rai and Sominder Rai, both sons of Ram Dewan Rai pouring some liquid over her body from a bottle and on account of severe burning sensation, she raised cry whereupon, both of them escaped. On hue and cry, her mother awaken, who also raised alarm attracting neighbours. Till then, she fainted. Today, she regained sense and then, found herself admitted at S.K.M.C.H. As she was unconscious so, she is unable to disclose the intermediary event, if any. Motive for the occurrence had been shown as seeing her mother a widow, the accused persons desired to get her marriage in his relationship which her mother declined and got her marriage at other place, in the aforesaid background, they developed a grudge and threatened and lastly, committed such activity with her.

3. Aforesaid fard-bayan was referred to local police, as a result of which, Meenapur P.S. Case No.142 of 2000 was registered. Consequent thereupon, investigation followed, concluded by way of submission of chargesheet only against the appellant named above. After commitment, the trial proceeded.

4. From the record, it transpires that accused Sominder Rai was not sent up for trial. However, after examination of the witnesses, Sominder Rai was summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Considering delay in his appearance, trial was bifurcated as Sessions Trial No.361 of 2005, wherein, it appears that after appearance of Sominder Rai, he faced trial and on account of some sort of relaxation having allowed at the end of the prosecution, he was acquitted. The original Sessions Trial proceeded and concluded in a manner, subject matter of instant appeal. The judgment and deposition of prosecution witnesses accordingly been exhibited at the end of the appellant. Though during course of examination of the concerned witnesses, aforesaid development has not been confronted.

5. Defence case, as has been pleaded while recording statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. as well as mode of cross-examination is that victim/ informant Renu Devi happens to be married in the relation of the appellant and as she had developed intimacy with her brother-in-law for which, the informant as well as her mother were scolded by the appellant and his family members, on account thereof, this false case has been instituted taking benefit of an incidence which informant confronted while cooking during course of which, she got hot oil over her person causing severe injury. Appellant had filed and exhibited the judgment, deposition of witnesses relating to Sessions Trial No.361 of 2005, whereunder co-accused Sominder Rai was acquitted.

6. From the L.C. Record, it is evident that altogether 15 witnesses have been examined. It is also evident that I.O., doctor have not been examined. It is evident from the chargesheet that I.O. as well as d

Click Here to Read the rest of this document