Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI, J.
Anil Sah Son of Banaras Sah and Ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State of Bihar - Respondents
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 425, 522, 742, 770 of 2015 with Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 85 of 2016
Decided On : 23-11-2017
Bail Cancellation - Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code, Section 307/149, Section 380/149, Section 458/149, Section 27 of the Arms Act - The court discussed the judgment of conviction and sentence under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act, and the subsequent appeal process. The court also considered the evidence presented, including witness testimonies and medical reports, and the arguments made by the defense and the prosecution. The judgment highlighted the lack of proper identification of the accused and inconsistencies in the prosecution's case, ultimately leading to the setting aside of the conviction and sentence.
Fact of the Case:
The accused persons were convicted and sentenced for various offenses under the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act. The case involved allegations of attempted murder, looting, and firearm injuries sustained by the victims. The defense claimed complete denial of the charges and raised issues regarding the identification of the accused and the nature of the crime.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence presented did not support the prosecution's case, as there were inconsistencies in witness testimonies and lack of proper identification of the accused. The court also noted that the nature of the crime appeared to be more aligned with a case of dacoity rather than the occurrence as suggested by the prosecution.
Issues: The key issues included the proper identification of the accused, the nature of the crime, and the reliability of the evidence presented by the prosecution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of proper identification of the accused, inconsistencies in witness testimonies, and the nature of the crime, leading to the setting aside of the conviction and sentence.
Final Decision: The judgment of conviction and sentence was set aside, and all the appeals were allowed. The appellants were discharged from their liabilities.
1. During course of trial (S. Tr. No. 475 of 2012) while the case was fixed for defence, and argument, the accused persons became absent as a result of which vide order dated 03.05.2011 their bail bonds were cancelled. Subsequently, Anil Shah and Madan Singh appeared on 17.06.2015 and were bailed out while Ambika Rai, Sukhal Rai and Bindeshwari Rai remained absent whereupon their trial were directed to be separated vide order dated 09.04.2012 as well as 30.01.2013 whereupon, Session Trial No. 475A of 2002 originated.
2. In original Session Trial No. 475 of 2002 the judgment of conviction was passed on 16.06.2015 as well as order of sentence dated 18.06.2015 by the 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Saran at Chhapra whereby and whereunder Anil Sah as well as Madan Singh have been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years as well as to pay fine Rs. 5,000/- in default thereof to undergo S.I. for six months, under Section 380/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs. 5,000/- in default thereof to undergo S.I. for six months, additionally, under Section 458/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs. 5,000/- in default thereof to undergo S.I. six months, and further, appellant Anil Sah has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs. 5,000/- and in default thereof to undergo S.I. for six months additionally, with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently and set off the period remaining in custody during trial in accordance with Section 428 of the Cr.P.C.
3. The remaining appellants that means to say Sukhal Rai (Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 742 of 2015), Bindeshwari Lal (Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 770 of 2015 and Ambika Rai (Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 85 of 2016) were under Sessions Trial No. 475A of 2002, whereunder they have been found guilty under the aforesaid sections having same set of sentence by the same court vide judgment of conviction dated 01.09.2015 as well as order of sentence dated 03.09.2015.
4. That being so, all the appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment.
5. On 23.06.2001 Ram Kishore Rai (P.W. 11) filed written report disclosing therein that during course of last Mukhiya election Asharfi Rai was one of the candidate, who asked for his support but, as he declined, the aforesaid Asharfi Rai withdrew his candidature in favour of Police Rai, who got elected. One week thereafter, Asharfi Rai had disclosed to police to commit murder of informant and in the aforesaid background, in between night of 22 / 23.06.2001, Anil Sah armed with gun, Ambika Rai armed with gun, Sukhal Rai armed with pistol, Bindeshwari Rai (could not see what he was possessing), Salik Rai armed with pistol, Jamadar Rai (could not see what he was possessing), Munna Ray armed with licensee gun, Madan Singh armed with lathi along with 10-12 unknown persons came at his Darwaja and began to fire. They were indulged in getting informant to be murdered as he posed himself to be a leader. After hearing the aforesaid dictum, he slipped and got himself concealed at some distance and from there, he began to see. During course thereof, he had seen 4-5 persons who climbed over a jeep having parked in front of his house and then got over his roof and then got down inside his house in order to trace him out and on being foiled, they looted away cash, ornaments, clothes etc. Then thereafter, they have gone to the place of Hawaldar Rai, Arun Rai, Chadeshwar Rai, Nand kishore Pandey and Tarkeshwar in search of him but became frustrated on account of his absence. The accused persons also took away their belongings. It had further been disclosed that on account of indis
AI
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
