SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Pat) 1111

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, SHAILENDRA SINGH, JJ.
Bibhash Mishra @ Bachchu Mishra, Son of Late Rajesh Mishra - Appellants
Versus
The State of Bihar - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (DB) No.607 Of 2019 with CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 418 of 2019 with CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 519 of 2019
Decided On : 31-07-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr. Rajan Ghoshrave, Adv., Mr. S.K. Lal, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Manish Kumar No.2, APP, Ms. Shashi Bala Verma, APP.

The court affirmed the conviction for murder based on consistent eyewitness testimony and corroborative medical evidence, establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 302/34 - Arms Act - Section 27 - Conviction for murder and illegal possession of arms - Appellants convicted for life imprisonment and fines imposed - Prosecution established guilt beyond reasonable doubt through eyewitness accounts and medical evidence - No error found in trial court's judgment. (Paras 3, 11, 33)

(B) Evidence - Eyewitness testimony - Consistency and corroboration of eyewitness accounts crucial for conviction - Medical evidence supported the cause of death and corroborated eyewitness accounts. (Paras 11, 30)

(C) Criminal Conspiracy - Insufficient evidence to support charges under Section 120B IPC - Charges not substantiated. (Para 13)

Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted for the murder of Munna Singh, a former Mukhiya, based on the testimony of eyewitnesses and medical evidence indicating death by firearm. The incident occurred on 08.10.2017, with the prosecution alleging a premeditated attack due to prior enmity. (Paras 4, 11)

Findings of Court:
The trial court found the prosecution's evidence credible, establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, with no significant contradictions in eyewitness accounts. (Paras 11, 33)

Issues: The main issues included the credibility of eyewitness testimony and the sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy charges. (Paras 13, 33)

Ratio Decidendi: The court upheld the trial court's findings, emphasizing the consistency of eyewitness accounts and the corroborative medical evidence, concluding that the prosecution had met its burden of proof. (Paras 11, 33)

Result: Appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.)

We have heard Mr. S.K. Lal, learned counsel for the appellants in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 418 of 2019 and Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 519 of 2019, Mr. Rajan Ghosharve, learned counsel for the appellant in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 607 of 2019 and Ms. Shashi Bala Verma as also Mr. Manish Kumar No. 2, learned APPs for the State.

2. These three appeals have been preferred for setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 15.03.2019 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment’) in Sessions Trial Nos. 74 of 2018 and 440 of 2018 arising out of Matihani P.S. Case No. 163 of 2017 and the order of sentence dated 19.03.2019 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned order’) passed by learned District and Sessions Judge, Begusarai (in short ‘the learned trial court’).

3. By the impugned judgment of conviction, the appellants have been convicted for the offences under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short ‘IPC’) and Section 27 of the Arms Act. By the impugned order, the appellants have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302/34 IPC with a fine of Rs.1,00,000/-each and in case of default of payment of fine, they have to further undergo six months simple imprisonment. For the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act, they have to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years with a fine of Rs.10,000/-and in default of payment of fine, they have to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. All the sentences are to run concurrently.

Prosecution Case

4. The prosecution case is based on the fardbeyan of Abhay Kumar (PW-4), son of the deceased (Munna Singh) in Sessions Trial No. 74 of 2018. In his fardbeyan made before Md. Nesar, Sub-Inspector of Police of Matihani Police Station, Begusarai, recorded on 08.10.2017 at 11:50 AM at Sadar Hospital, Begusarai, the informant (PW-4) has stated that on 08.10.2017 at 10:00 AM, his father Munna Singh had started for his ‘Dera’ from his house by his motorcycle bearing no. BR09P-4749 and when he reached near the bungalow of Lukho Singh at about 10:10 AM, the informant together with one Sanjeev Kumar (PW-1) left his house by another motorcycle in connection with the work of the Panchayat. It is the case of the informant that as soon as his father reached near the house of Lukho Singh, (i) Chunchun Singh, (ii) Bibhash Mishra @ Bachchu Mishra, (iii) Bimlesh Kumar and (iv) Gulshan Kumar, all of village Ramdiri who were there with a pre-plan came out. Bibhash Mishra forcibly stopped the father of the informant and Bimlesh Kumar and Gulshan Kumar surrounded his father whereafter Chunchun Singh (absconder) who was armed with a pistol fired on the father of the informant, the shot fired by him hit on the left shoulder of the father of the informant, he fell down and became restless. At that very moment, the informant claimed to have reached there. According to him, Bibhash Mishra and Bimlesh Kumar said that now the work is done, therefore, they should flee away (‘Chalo Bhago Kaam tamam ho gya hai’) and all these accused persons fled away on motorcycle. The informant with the help of his family members brought his father in injured condition to Sadar Hospital, Begusarai where the doctors declared him dead. The informant (PW4) has stated that all the four persons are of criminal nature and they had spread a reign of terror in the village, father of the informant was a former Mukhiya, other family members of the informant are the representative of the Panchayat, therefore, the father of the informant was opposing them. According to the informant, this opposition is the reason behind the occurrence. He alleged that all the four accused persons conspired and killed his father.

5. After investigation of the case, as it appears from the records, the Investigating Officer (PW-6) submitted a chargesheet bearing No. 08 of 2018 dated 24.01.2018 against accused, namely, (i) Bibhash Mishra @ Bachchu Mishra and (ii) Gulshan Kumar @ Gautam Kumar

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top