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

2025 Supreme(Pat) 76

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
MOHIT KUMAR SHAH and SONI SHRIVASTAVA, JJ.
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 880 of 2016
(25.3.2025)
Sachidanand Singh & Ors. ... Appellants
vs.
State of Bihar ... Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : M/s Madhusudan Kumar, Shiva Shankar Sharma.
For the Respondent: Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh, APP.

Headnote:

Criminal Trial – "Injured Witnesses" – There is no doubt that the injured witnesses are accorded special status and they offer an extremely valuable piece of evidence. (Para 30)

Criminal Trial – "Oral evidence" vis-à-vis "medical evidence" – The law relating to conflict between oral and medical evidence is well settled to the effect that unless and until the medical evidence is irreconcilably in conflict with the oral evidence, the oral testimony of the eye witnesses cannot be doubted – In the present case, there being specific allegation of assault on the head and correspondingly two injuries found on the head coupled with haematoma under the scalp on the occipital region and one communicating fracture on the right temporal parietal regions, it can be concluded that there is no irreconcilable conflict between the oral and medical evidence which can be sufficient to discard the prosecution case. (Para 33)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 and Section 304 Part II – Murder with no intention to cause death – "Intent" and "knowledge" the act done by the appellants, who had caused death of the deceased, was with a knowledge that such act is likely to cause death but the facts are not such, so as to establish the intention of the appellants to cause death of the deceased – "Intent" and "knowledge" are ingredients of Section 299 IPC and so far an act done by an accused which causes death with a knowledge that the death was likely to be caused by such act but they did not have any intention to cause death, would come within the purview of Section 304 Part II IPC – In absence of intention on the part of the appellants to cause death, the present case cannot be described as murder but it would be culpable homicide not amounting to murder. (Paras 41 & 42

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 386(b) – Power of appellate court to alter nature and extence of sentence – In the present case, the conviction under Section 302 IPC converted to Section 304 Part II IPC – Accused persons were using sickle for cutting crops but never used the same for purpose of assaulting the prosecution side – Subsequently, the lathi, Danda and Farsa were picked up for assault, after altercation between the parties started taking a serious turn over cutting of mustard crops by the appellants and loading it in the tractor – Appellant 2 and 3 only giving lathi blows – It is abundantly clear that they never intended to cause any serious injury – Deceased not dying immediately but died during the course of treatment – Injured eye-witnesses receiving simple injuries – It is indicative of the fact that there was complete absence of any intention to cause any serious injury to anyone – Sentence reduced to period already undergone. (Paras 56, 57, 58 & 61)

Munna Gope Vs. State of Bihar, 2019 (1) BLJ 717 : 2019(2) PLJR 1171; Nageshwar Sao Vs. State of Bihar, 1999(3) All PLR 328; Ramesh Choudhary Vs. State of Bihar, 2023(3) BLJ 465 : 2023(2) PLJR 835; Anand Singh Vs. State of Bihar, 2019 (1) PLJR 571 – Distinguished.

Abdul Sayeed Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2010) 10 SCC 259; Birbal Nath Vs. State of Rajasthan, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1396; Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai Vs. State of Gujarat, AIR 1983 SC 484; Dalip Singh Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1953 SC 364; Behari Prasad Vs. State of Bihar, (1996) 2 SCC 317: AIR 1996 SC 2904; Bahadur Naik Vs. State of Bihar, (2000) 9 SCC 153; Khokhan @ Khokan Vishwas Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, (2021) 3 SCC 365; Litta Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan, (2015) 15 SCC 327; Randhir Singh Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1982 SC 55; Deepak Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2018) 8 SCC 228; Joseph Vs. State of Kerala, 1995 SCC (Cri) 165; N. Ramkumar Vs. State Rep. By Inspector, in Cr. Appeal No. 2006 of 2023; Buddhu Singh Vs. State of Bihar, (2011)14 SCC 471 – Relied.

Soni Shrivastava, J.—The present appeal under Section 374(2) read with Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C') has been preferred against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 05.08.2016 and 10.08.2016 respectively, passed by the Court of 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in Sessions Trial No.276 of 2002, arising out of Karja P.S. Case No.16 of 2000, whereby and whereunder the appellants have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') and they have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default thereof, they have been directed to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The appellants have been further convicted under Section 148 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for 2 years. The appellants have also been convicted under Section 147 of the I.P.C. as also Sections 323 and 324 of the I.P.C., however, no separate sentence has been awarded thereunder. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

2. The short facts of the case arising out of the First Information Report based on the fardbeyan of Lal Babu Singh, the informant, whose fardbeyan was recorded at Sadar Hospital, Muzaffarpur on 09.02.2000 at 12:30 PM, is that on the same day, i.e. on 09.02.2000 at around 07:30 AM, while the informant was sitting at his shop and having tea, the accused persons being Sachidanand Singh (appellant no.1), Mitendra Singh (Appellant No.2), Satyendra Singh (Appellant No.3), Mintu Singh and Sakal Mahto came on their tractor and asked them to accompany to the field, with regard to some talks regarding the land. Pursuant to such asking, the informant along with the brother Raj Kishore Singh went to the field while the accused persons had already reached on their tractor. The two brothers, being the informant (PW-4) and the deceased, arrived later to find that the accused persons were cutting the mustard crops from their fields and on being objected, the accused persons started hurling abuses which was protested by the informant. It was on this issue that Sachidanand Singh (Appellant No.1) took out a farsa which was kept concealed in the tractor from before and his son Mintu Singh took out a knife which he had concealed in his waist. Satyendra Singh (Appellant No.3), Mitendra Singh (Appellant No.2) and Sakal Mahto also brought lathis from the tractor and all of them started assaulting the informant and the deceased by means of lathi, farsa and knife with the intention to kill him. The informant's elder brother Raj Kishore Singh (deceased) was indiscriminately assaulted by farsa and lathi on the head on account of which he became badly injured and also fell being unconscious. The informant alleges that he was also assaulted by means of lathi, danda and farsa resulting in an injury caused on the finger of his right hand, being a bleeding injury. It has been further alleged by the informant, that his cousin Birendra Singh (PW-7), who was working in the adjacent field, came running in his bid to save the informant and the deceased, however he was also assaulted by means of lathi and danda resulting in an injury on his right wrist. The brother of the informant Raj Kishore Singh was lying in an unconscious state with bleeding injuries and thinking him to be dead, the accused persons left the place of occurrence. During the course of all this, hulla (alarm) was raised, pursuant to which the persons working in the adjacent fields assembled at the place of occurrence, whereafter the accused persons kept the cut mustard crops on the tractor and fled away. Thereafter, it is stated that the informant and others ran to the village, got a jeep and took their brother Raj Kishore Singh along with Birendra Kumar Singh, Pramod Kumar, Jiwach Singh, Pawan Singh, Kalika Singh, Jalim Singh and others to Sadar Hospital, Muzaffarpur, where trea

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