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

2024 Supreme(Pat) 1110

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA, JJ.
Shyam Kumar @ Gabbar Paswan, Son of Ramashray Paswan - Appellant
Versus
The State Of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.1215 of 2018 with CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 1207 of 2018
Decided On : 30-07-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate, Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate, Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Advocate, Mrs. Kiran Kumari, Advocate, Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh, APP.
For the Informant :Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate, Dr. Bipin Chandra, Adv.

The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; failure to do so results in acquittal.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 374(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302/34, 307/34, 120B - Explosive Substance Act - Sentences of life imprisonment and fines imposed on appellants for murder and conspiracy - Appeals filed against conviction and sentence - Court found gross delay in lodging F.I.R. (27 hours) without plausible explanation, and inconsistencies in witness testimonies, leading to doubts about the prosecution's case. (Paras 1, 5, 23, 30)

(B) Burden of Proof - The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and failure to do so results in acquittal. (Paras 29, 30)

Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted for the murder of an advocate and a child during a bomb attack, allegedly due to a land dispute and threats made in court. The incident occurred on 30.07.2015, and the F.I.R. was lodged 27 hours later.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt due to significant contradictions and lack of credible evidence.

Issues: The main issues were the delay in lodging the F.I.R., the credibility of witness testimonies, and the existence of a conspiracy.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the prosecution's failure to provide a plausible explanation for the delay and the inconsistencies in witness statements undermined the case, leading to the conclusion that the appellants could not be convicted.

Result: Appeals allowed; convictions quashed and set aside.

JUDGMENT :

(Vipul M. Pancholi, J.)

The present appeals have been filed under Section-374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as ‘Cr.P.C.’) challenging the impugned judgment of conviction dated 03.08.2018 and order of sentence dated 10.08.2018, passed by the 1st Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Sessions Trial Nos. 425 of 2016 and 426 of 2016 (arising out of Karja P.S. Case No. 85 of 2015), whereby appellant Shambhu Paswan has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for life with fine of Rs. 10,000/- u/S-302/34 of I.P.C. and, in default of payment of fine, R.I. of 6 months. He has further been sentenced to undergo R.I. of 10 years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- u/S-307/34 of I.P.C. and, in default of payment of fine, further R.I. of 3 months. He has further been sentenced R.I. for life and fine of Rs. 10,000/- u/S- 120B of I.P.C. and, in default of payment of fine to further serve R.I. of 6 months. He has further been awarded 7 years of R.I. u/S- 4 of the Explosive Substance Act. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. Appellant Shyam Kumar @ Gabbar Paswan has been sentenced to R.I. for life and fine of Rs. 10,000/- u/S-120B read with Section 302 of I.P.C. and, in default of payment of fine, to serve further R.I. of 6 months.

2. Heard learned counsel Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, assisted by Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh for the appellants, learned Senior Counsel Mr. Ramakant Sharma assisted by Mr. Bipin Chandra for the informant, and Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh, learned A.P.P. for the respondent State.

3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeals are as under:

“On 30.07.2015 the informant was going with his brother on a motorcycle Braj Kishore Sharma to assist him in catching the vehicle for Civil Court, Muzaffarpur where he is a practising advocate. At 09:15 a.m. they reached petrol pump Chowk and as soon his brother Braj Kishore Sharma got down, accused Shambhu Paswan, son of Ram Ashray Paswan, Guddu Kumar, son of Late Ram Prit Rai, both residents of village-Chamrua, P.S. Karja, District-Muzaffarpur came there with three unknown. Accused Shambhu Paswan rebuked his brother for advocating against Gabbar Paswan and threatened to kill him. Saying this, Shambhu Paswan hurled a bomb targetting Braj Kishore Sharma, as a result of which his belly burst out and organs were split into pieces. When the informant left the vehicle and tried to flee, accused Shambhu Paswan hurled another bomb upon him with a view to kill him. Again accused Guddu Kumar hurled a bomb which hit the child standing on the road named Ashik Kumar, son of Tuntun Mahto of village-Rautania, as a result of which the body of the child split into pieces and he died instantly. In the meantime, the informant’s elder brother Nawal Kishore Sharma reached there to take diesel and witnessed the incident. Shortly police from Karja Police Station came at the spot and took the dead body to Muzaffarpur and on being declared by the Doctor, the police sent the dead body to S.K.M.C.H. for post mortem. The incident was witnessed by the people present there. After committing the crime, the accused persons fled away towards West. The reason behind the incident is the threat given by Gabbar Paswan in the court premises when he was produced in Court in connection with Karja P.S. Case No. 79 of 2013 lodged for committing the murder of Ravi Shankar Sah, son of Late Bhim Bali Sah of village- Bangri, P.S. Kauri, District-Muzaffarpur on 13.07.2015. On 13.07.2015 itself the informant’s brother had informed about the threat given after returning from Court. The informant apprehends that Gabbar Paswan, who is in jail custody, has got his brother and the child murdered through his brothers Shambhu Paswan and Guddu Paswan and three unknown by hatching a criminal conspiracy.”

4. After filing of the F.I.R., the investigating agency carried out the investigation and, during the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the state

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top