Back
2018 Supreme(Pat) 242
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
VINOD KUMAR SINHA, J.
Satrughan Singh Son of Sheo Pujan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.84 of 2004
Decided on : 09-03-2018
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Arun Kumar Tripathi, Amicus Curiae.
For the Respondent: Mr. Bipin Kumar, APP
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and the lack of evidence leading to the setting aside of the conviction and sentence.
Headnote:
Assault - Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code, Section 323, Section 448 - Summary: The court discussed the prosecution's case of assault by the appellants and the lack of evidence to establish the assault. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case of assault by the appellants, leading to the allowance of the appeal and setting aside of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved an appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Adhoc Sessions Judge, where the appellant was convicted under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code for an alleged assault.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish its case of assault by the appellants, leading to the allowance of the appeal and setting aside of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence.
Issues: The issues revolved around the alleged assault by the appellants and the lack of evidence to support the prosecution's case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the lack of evidence to establish the assault by the appellants, as the prosecution failed to prove its case.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence were set aside.
Nobody has appeared on behalf of the appellant in spite of repeated calls and it appears that the case is of the year 2004, as such, I deem it appropriate to appoint Mr. Arun Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel as Amicus Curiae to assist the court.
2. This appeal is against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.01.2004, passed by Sri. N.C. Lala, the then Adhoc Sessions Judge, Additional Court No. 2, Patna in Sessions Trial No. 415 of 1992, by which the appellant Shatrughan Singh was convicted under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months and other appellants were also convicted under Section 323 of the IPC but they were released on probation under Section 4 of the probation of Offenders Act.
3. It appears that other appellants, namely, Ram Dhyan Singh, Shyam Pati Devi and Madhuri Devi have already furnished the probation bond of Rs. 2,000,/- and period of six months have also expired as such, this appeal with regard to these three appellants stand abated.
4. Prosecution case as per the fardbeyan of Geeta Devi (informant and P.W. 3) recorded by the officer in charge Gaurichak police station, in short is that, on 06.09.1998 at 05 A.M., mother of appellant Shtraughan Singh and one Sunita Devi daughter of Bhola Sonar had gone to ease out themselves in dilapidated portion of house of the informant and when informant protested and abused, they left the place. It is further alleged that at about 5.30 A.M. appellant Shatrughan Singh came to her and asked her as to why she had abused his mother. On this, she replied that why she daily come to ease out in her house. Thereafter, the appellant Shtrughan Singh dashed her on a cot and started attempting to commit rape on her but as she had delivered a baby 15 to 20 days ago, she could not resist. In the meantime, wife of one Yogendra Singh came and appellant Shatrughan Singh left her and started fleeing away from her house and on query made by the wife of said Yogendra Singh, informant disclosed that the appellant committed rape on her. On hearing this, the accused returned and assaulted the informant by means of fists and slaps. In the meantime, her husband, who had gone to ease out himself, returned and informant narrated the occurrence to him, thereafter other accused- appellants reached there and assaulted the informant and his husband with fists and slaps, causing injury to her and her husband.
5. On the basis of the said fardbeyan of informant, Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 392/88 was registered against the appellants. Police after investigation submitted charge-sheet. Cognizance of the offence was taken and the case was committed to the court of Sessions, which ultimately came to the file of Sri. N.C. Lala, the then Adhoc Sessions Judge, Additional Court No. 2, Patna in Sessions Trial No. 415 of 1992, for trial and disposal.
6. Charge was framed against the appellant Shtraughan Singh under Section 323, 448, and 376 of the IPC and charge was framed against other accused – appellant under Section 323 and 448 of the IPC.
7. In order to substantiate the charges, prosecution has examined altogether seven witnesses, they are; P.W. 1 – Mritunjay Singh (son of informant), P.W. 2 – Kritya Nand Singh (husband of the informant), P.W. 3 – Geeta Devi (informant), P.W. 4 – Binda Singh, P.W. 5 – Rajeshwar Singh, P.W. 6 – Dr. S. Bhatia, who had examined the informant and P.W. 7 – Dudheshwar Singh (Investigating Officer), who treated and examined the injured and P.W. 8 – Amar Nath Jha ( Investigating Officer.)
8. The defene of the appellant is of false implication and denial of any such occurrence.
9. Post trial, learned Trial Court though not found the case true against the appellant under Section 376 and 448 of the IPC, however, he convicted the appellant under Section 323 of the IPC and sentenced him in the manner as stated above.
10. Being aggrieved, the appellants preferred the present appeal.
11. Contention of learned Amicus Curiae is that
