IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
A. M. BADAR and CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA, JJ.
Criminal Appeal (DB) Nos.117, 199 of 2018
(19.5.2023)
Nikesh Rai @ Piyush Raj
& Anr. (in 117)
Avinash Rai (in 199) ... Appellants
vs.
State of Bihar ... Respondent
(in both)
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302/34 read with Section 120B – Arms Act, 1959 – Section 27(1) – Murder and criminal conspiracy – Common intention – Life sentence – Deceased were attacked by appellants/convicts in broad daylight where motive behind attack is clear as there was previous enmity between accused/appellant/convict qua informant – Testimony of eye-witness cannot be disbelieved merely because certain insignificant, normal or natural contradictions have appeared into his testimony – Ocular evidence is corroborated by medical evidence and also with seizure list – There is no reason to interfere in findings of conviction and order of sentence of two appellants – However, prosecution failed to established any common intention or conspiracy on part of appellant/convict from evidences available on record to established his guilt beyond reasonable doubts – Impugned order and judgment and sentence passed by trial court set aside qua appellant/convict. (Paras 30 to 35)
Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.—Heard Mr. Rajendra Narayan, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Mr. Binod Bihari Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State in both Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 117 of 2018 and Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 199 of 2018.
2. Both above mentioned appeals are preferred challenging judgment of conviction dated 18.12.2017 and order of sentence dated 22.12.2017, as passed in Sessions Trial No. 107 of 2012/4868 of 2014 (arising out of Chapra Town P.S. Case No. 154 of 2011) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 9th Saran at Chapra, where appellant no. 1, Nikesh Rai @ Piyush Raj was convicted through Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 117 of 2018 for the offences alleged under Section 302/34 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27(1) of the Arms Act and sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 302/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code with a fine of Rs. 50,000/- and also appellant no. 2 namely Shambhu Rai for the offences alleged under Section 120B read with Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 50,000/-. Further, to convict appellant Avinash Rai in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 199 of 2018 for the offence alleged under Sections 302/34 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 50,000/-, and in case of default to pay fine, further to undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months. He was also convicted under Section 27(1) of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs. 5000/- and in failure of payment of fine, further undergo for rigorous imprisonment of six months.
3. Both above criminal appeals heard together and decided through this common judgment.
4. Factual matrix of this case as it springs from written information of the informant, namely, Shashi Bhushan Singh (PW-2) dated 20.07.2011 that his younger brother, namely, Mani Bhushan Singh, proceed from his village “Jhaua Basant” at about 1.00 PM to the house of his friend, namely, Pappu Singh in connection to discuss business matter and thereafter to visit Lucknow by train in evening, in meantime, he received a call at about 3:30 PM from one Chandrashekhar Singh, resident of Ghosh Colony, P.S. Muffasil, Chapra as to come immediately to the house of Pappu Ji, where indiscriminate firing was made, which is still continue, where 3-4 persons received gun shot injuries. On said information, informant (PW-2) went to the place of occurrence and found that his brother Mani Bhushan Singh, his driver Dinesh Yadav, Son of Bhikhari Rai, Resident of Banwari Basant, P.S. Garkha and one Devendra Singh, Son of Late Sudama Singh, Resident of Pipra Thana, Panapur, were found killed due to gun shot injuries. He inquired about the occurrence from Pappu Singh, where he came to know that 4-5 unknown accused persons arrived there equipped with AK-47 rifles, carbine and revolver and opened indiscriminate firing immediately after coming to the room of first floor, where Mani Bhushan Singh, Dinesh Yadav and Devendra Singh were killed. He raised suspicion that the murder of his brother and others were done by Avinash Rai, S/o Jamadar Rai (Appellant/convict), Resident of Banwari Basant, Thana Garakha, Nikesh Rai @ Piyush Raj (Appellant/convict), Son of Laxman Rai, Mahesh Rai, Son of Laxman Rai, Both residents of Ramgarha, P.S. Autar Nagar, Devendra Singh @ Puttu, resident of Banwar, P.S. Daudpur and their associates. Reason for suspicion as explained that all these accused persons were in inimical terms with informant and also with his deceased brother Mani Bhushan Singh as one Sanjay Singh their friend was killed some years back by one Rakesh Rai, who is the brother of co-accused Mahesh Rai. It is further stated that he was named in the murder case of one Mohan Rai, who was Fufa (husband of his father’s sister) of co-accused Mahesh Rai. It is also stated that Rakesh Ra
Conviction based solely on testimonies of related witnesses is unsafe without independent corroboration, as evidenced by inconsistencies and lack of physical evidence.
The need for reliable witness testimonies and corroborating evidence, especially in the absence of independent witnesses, to establish charges beyond reasonable doubt.
The court upheld the conviction for murder but commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment, emphasizing the need for extreme caution in imposing capital punishment.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder based on consistent eyewitness testimony and corroborative medical evidence, establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The prosecution failed to establish the credibility of its key witness, leading to the acquittal of the accused due to insufficient evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, and contradictions and doubts in the evidence can lead to the f....
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.