IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Ashwani Kumar Singh, Arvind Srivastava, JJ.
Hafiz Mian @ Hafiz Miya - Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (D B) No. 406 of 2016
Decided On : 17-08-2021
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302/34 & 323 – Murder – appellants (accused) armed with lathi surrounded the father and uncle of the informant and assaulted with lathi as a result of which the father died – subsequently, the uncle also succumbed to the injuries – dispute over the cutting the branch of a tree – for the same offence a counter case was instituted – accused persons also sustained injuries in the incident which the prosecution did not explain – considering that there was free tight between the paties, the Trial Court acquitted the appellants of charges under Sections 307 & 325 IPC – the weapon used in offence was not seized by the I.O. though three of the accused persons arrested on the date of occurrence itself – in the counter case, the members of the prosecution party have been granted bail – it was incumbent upon the I.O. to find out truth and to present the relevant facts before the court – the failure of the police to disclose the outcome of the FIR coupled with the fact the accused were also admitted in the same hospital where the injured members of the prosecution party were being treated, but their injury report was not brought on record and suppressed by the prosecution creates suspicion – all the witnesses except official witnesses are relatives – ocular testimony of the witnesses for the prosecution is inconsistent with the medical evidence – the witnesses stated that both the deceased sustained injuries all over their bodies from their head to toes, but in the post-mortem examination, the doctor did not find any ante-mortem injury on the bodies of the deceased except the injury over their head – conviction not justified – impugned judgment and order set aside – appeal allowed. (Paras 38, 39, 40, 42, 44, 47, 54, 62 & 63)
(1995)5 SCC 518, AIR 1975 SC 1962, (2004)10 SCC 443 – Referred.
JUDGMENT
Ashwani Kumar Singh, J. - Heard Mr. A. K. Thakur, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The appellants have challenged the judgment of conviction dated 14.03.2016 and the order of sentence dated 17.03.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Saran at Chapra in Sessions Trial No.209 of 2014 arising out of Baniyapur P.S. Case No.274 of 2013.
3. By the aforesaid judgment dated 14.03.2016, the appellants' Hafiz Mian @ Hafiz Miya, Khalil Mian @ Khalil Miya, Ibrahim Mian @ Ibrahim Miya and Qurban Mian @ Kurban Miya have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC').
4. After hearing the convicts on the point of sentence, vide consequential order dated 17.03.2016, the Trial Court sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.25,000/- each for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the IPC and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for an additional period of six months and rigorous imprisonment of six months for the offence punishable under Section 323 of the IPC. The Trial Court further directed that both the sentences shall run concurrently.
5. The sessions trial, in which the impugned judgment and order were passed relates to the First Information Report (for short 'FIR') that had been registered on 23.11.2013 at 10 AM in Baniyapur Police Station under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'CrPC') in respect of an incident that had occurred at village Amaon, Dhobi Tola situated at a distance of one and a half kilometres south-west from Baniyapur Police Station at 8.30 AM on 23.11.2013.
6. The FIR giving rise to the sessions trial was registered based on the fardbeyan of one Nasruddin Mian (P.W. 4), which was reduced into writing by one Rakesh Kumar, a Sub-Inspector of Baniyapur Police Station.
7. In his farbeyan, the informant Nasruddin Mian alleged that on 23.11.2013 at 8.30 AM, a panchayati was commenced near his house for cutting the branch of a pakari tree (white fig) in which Sabib Mian, Habib Mian and Khalil Mian, all three sons of Mithu Mian and other villagers had participated. Khalil Mian and his sons did not accept the decision taken in the panchayati and started abusing the informant and his father, which was protested by them. Thereafter, Khalil Mian and his sons came with lathi from their houses and started indiscriminately assaulting his father Sabib Mian and uncle Habib Mian due to which his father sustained injuries and fell down. Because of the assault, blood started oozing out from the skull of his father, Sabib Mian and uncle, Habib Mian. When he along with his brothers Suleman Mian and Babujan Mian tried to intervene, the accused persons assaulted them also. He with the help of villagers took Sabib Mian and Habib Mian to the Referral Hospital, Baniyapur where the doctor declared his father Sabib Mian as dead. Considering the serious condition of his uncle Habib Mian, the doctor, after giving first aid, referred him to Sadar Hospital, Chapra for better treatment. The cause of occurrence was that a day before Muharram, his younger brother Babujan and cousin Qyamuddin son of Habib Mian (both not examined) had cut a branch of pakari tree for which the panchayati was convened.
8. On receipt of the aforesaid fardbeyan of the informant at 10 AM on 23.11.2013, one Govind Rajbanshi (not examined), the Station House Officer (for short 'SHO') Baniyapur Police Station, Saran registered Baniyapur P.S. Case No.274 of 2013 under Sections 341, 323, 325, 307, 302 and 504 read with 34 of the IPC against Khalil Mian, Ibrahim Mian, Qurban Mian and Hafiz Mian and entrusted the investigation to Rakesh Kumar, a Sub-Inspector of Police.
9. The further case of the prosecution is that Habib Mian was referred from Sadar Hospital Chapra to Patna where he died after 3 days.
10. On completion of the i
Balka Singh vs. State of Punjab
Ram Bali vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
The court established that intent to kill can be inferred from the nature and severity of injuries inflicted, and direct eyewitness testimony, when corroborated by medical evidence, is sufficient to ....
Eyewitness testimony must be consistent and corroborated; convictions cannot rely solely on the testimony of closely related witnesses without independent verification.
The prosecution must prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and any reasonable doubt leads to acquittal.
Point of law : Where an offence like murder is committed in secrecy inside a house, initial burden to establish case would undoubtedly be upon prosecution, but nature and amount of evidence to be led....
Non-examination of the Investigating Officer and critical medical witnesses raises doubts about the prosecution's case, necessitating acquittal due to insufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of corroborative evidence, the limited evidentiary value of the FIR, and the need to sift the evidence with care, emphasizing that t....
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.