IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Ashutosh Kumar, Jitendra Kumar, JJ.
Vidya Sagar Mallah S/O Late Bikerma Mallah and ors. – Appellants
Versus
The State Of Bihar - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (DB) No.941 of 2013, GOVT. APPEAL (DB) No. 6 of 2015
Decided On : 15-07-2024
JUDGMENT :
Jitendra Kumar, J.
Both the appeals have been taken up together as they arise out of the same Sessions Trial bearing S.T. No. 48 of 1988, arising out of Assaon P.S. Case No. 16 of 1986, corresponding to G.R. No. 1109 of 1986. Both the appeals have been preferred against the same impugned judgment.
2. The Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 941 of 2013 has been preferred against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 07.09.2013 and 09.09.2013, respectively passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-III, Siwan, whereas the Govt. Appeal (DB) No. 6 of 2015 has been preferred by the State against the judgment of acquittal by the same impugned judgment dated 07.09.2013 passed by learned Trial Court.
3. By the impugned judgment of conviction dated 07.09.2013, the appellants of Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 941 of 2013 have been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, whereas the respondents of Govt. Appeal (DB) No. 6 of 2015 have been acquitted of all charges. By the impugned order of sentence dated 09.09.2013, the appellants of Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 941 of 2013 have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- each and in case of default to pay the fine, to undergo additional simple imprisonment for two years under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in case of default to pay the fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment of six months under Section 27 of the Arms Act. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
4. The Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 941 of 2013 was initially filed by the four appellants. However, during pendency of the appeal, two appellants/Maha Sagar Mallah and Shri Kishun Mallah died, whose cases have abated. The Govt. Appeal (DB) No. 6 of 2015 was initially filed against 13 respondents. However, during pendency of the appeal, four respondents/Rameshwar Mallah, Ramchandra Mallah, Indrasan Mallah and Shankar Singh died. Hence, their names have been deleted from the array of the respondents vide order dated 21.12.2023. The name of respondent/Anil Upadhaya @ Munna has also been deleted from the array of the respondents vide order dated 05.01.2016 on prayer of the appellant, because the appellant could not find the address of this respondent.
5. The FIR bearing Assaon P.S. case No. 16 of 1986, was registered on 09.05.1986 at 17:00 O’clock on the fardebayan of the informant/Nagnarayan Rai against twenty one named accused persons, including the appellants of Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 941 of 2013 and the respondents of Govt. Appeal (DB) No. 6 of 2015 and some unknown persons for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 324, & 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
6. The prosecution case as emerging from the fardebayan of the informant/Nagnarayan Rai is that on 09.05.1986 at 10:00 am, he along with Mukhiya, Pradosh Nath Rai, Gorakhnath Rai and Parikshan Kumhar was cutting maize crops of Mukhiya Ji. One Brahma Singh came and gave information to Mukhiya Ji that Mallah people along with some outsiders were fishing in Pachbenia pond. They were also carrying arms. On this information, the informant and others who were cutting the maize crops went along with Mukhiya Ji to the Pachbenia pond and saw that Uma Mallah, Ram Prawesh Mallah, Ram Aghan Mallah, Dev Mallah, Ramjit Mallah, Mangru Mallah, Indrasan Mallah, Vidya Sagar Mallah, Mahasagar Mallah, Nihora Mallah, Harendra Mallah, all resident of village Singhpur police station in Assaon were carrying country made pistols and guns. Ramashray Kohar, resident of Trikalpur P.S. Assaon, Shri Kishun Mallah, resident of Toka, Rajkishore Pandey, resident of Pachbenia, Shamsher Ojha resident of village Khardara and Hridaya Singh were carrying gun in their hands. Munna Upadhyay, resident of Pachbenia, Vijay Singh, Shankar Singh a
Buta Singh Vs. Sttate of Punjab
Genda Singh and Ors. Vs. State of U.P.
The court established that the accused acted in self-defense against an unlawful assembly, leading to their acquittal despite initial convictions.
To establish a case under Section 34 of I.P.C. prosecution has to prove prior meeting of minds which may be determined from the conduct of the offenders unfolding itself during the course of action a....
The right of private defense is justified when imminent danger is present, and the response must be proportionate to the threat.
The right of private defense under IPC Sections 100 and 102 was upheld, leading to the acquittal of the accused as they acted in self-defense during the incident.
The court established that the use of deadly weapons in a coordinated attack indicates a common intention to kill, and the defense of private defense was not applicable as the accused did not demonst....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of joint liability under section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, supported by precedents, to attribute criminal responsibility to 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.