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) 252

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY, JJ.
Arjun Yadav @ Arjun Rai, S/o late Kameshwar Ray – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondents
Criminal Appeal (DB) No.203 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2009 
With
Baijnath Singh, S/O Late Ramchandra Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 119 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2009 
Decided On : 05-05-2025

Advocates appeared:
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 203 of 2023)
For the Appellant/s :Ms. Nikita Mittal, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Mukeshwar Dayal, APP
For the Respondent No.2:Mr. Ansul, Sr. Advocate
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 119 of 2023)
For the Appellant/s :Mr. Ansul, Sr. Advocate
For the State : Mr. Mukeshwar Dayal, APP

The court determined that the accused's act constituted murder due to intentional infliction of injury likely to cause death, overruling the trial court's classification of the offense.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 299, 304 Part II, and 302 - Criminal appeal challenging conviction and acquittal on charges of culpable homicide and murder - Appeals addressed together. (Para 1)

(B) Legal principles - The court emphasized the distinction between culpable homicide and murder, indicating intent and knowledge of resulting death as critical factors. (Para 60)

(C) Findings of court - The trial court's findings on causation of death from negligence in treatment contrasted with appellate court's assertion of direct causation from the accused's actions. (Paras 59, 60)

(D) Issues - The appellate court addressed the correctness of the trial court's acquittal on the murder charge and the findings leading to a conviction under culpable homicide. (Para 62) (E) Ratio decidendi - The appellate court concluded that the assault's nature and intent justified a conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC, overturning the trial court's decision. (Paras 60, 61) (F) Result - The conviction was altered from culpable homicide to murder, and the sentence awaited further hearing. (Para 61) (G) Parties involved - Appellant 1: Informant; Appellant 2: Respondent No. 2; State of Bihar: Respondent. (H) Dissenting opinion - None evident in the judgment.

Table of Content
1. admission and judgment context (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. factual background amidst police proceedings (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. trial court's findings on culpability (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
4. appellant's objections to trial court view (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20)
5. respondent counsels' defense and argument (Para 22 , 23 , 25)
6. court's evaluation of witness credibility (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)
7. analysis of prosecution evidence sufficiency (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38)
8. medical evidence linking injury to death (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42)
9. summary of supporting evidence (Para 43 , 44)
10. legal definitions and interpretations related to culpable homicide and murder (Para 49 , 50 , 58)
11. intent to kill established for conviction of murder. (Para 59)
12. court's final determination of culpability (Para 60)
13. conclusion and subsequent orders by the court (Para 61 , 62 , 63)

JUDGMENT :

RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J.

These two appeals have been filed against the judgment dated 22.11.2022 and the order dated 24.11.2022 passed in Sessions Trial No. 675 of 2009, arising out of Taraiya P.S. Case No. 54 of 2009 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘impugned judgment and order’ respectively) by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-IXth, Saran at Chapra (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned trial court’).

2. By the impugned judgment, the learned trial court held respondent no. 2 (Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 203 of 2023) guilty of the offence punishable under Section 304 Part II of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (in short ‘IPC’). The respondent no. 2 has been sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 304 Part II of the IPC with a fine of Rs. 20,000/- . In default of payment of fine, he has been ordered to undergo three months simple imprisonment. All sentences shall run concurrently. The learned trial court has, however, acquitted the respondent no. 2 of the charge under Section 302 IPC.

3. The appellant in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 203 of 2023 is the informant of the case who is aggrieved by the impugned judgment whereby the Respondent No. 2 has been acquitted of the charge under Section 302 IPC and has been convicted for a lesser offence i.e. culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

4. Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 119 of 2023 has been preferred by the respondent no. 2 of Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 203 of 2023 for setting aside the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence.

5. With the consent of the parties, both the appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

Prosecution case

6. The informant, namely, Kameshwar Rai (since deceased/victim) in his fardbeyan recorded on 04.06.2009 at about 08:00 PM at Referral Hospital, Taraiya in emergency ward alleged that on the same day at about 06:30 PM, he was returning his house along with his son Arjun Rai from village Andharwari after grinding flour. When he reached near the house of one Rajendra Rai, in the meantime, a motorcycle came from the side of Taraiya and stopped near the house of Rajendra Rai and one Baijnath Singh got down from the motorcycle and with an intention to kill the informant assaulted him by dagger twice in his ribcage and shoulder due to which he became unconscious and fell down. Thereafter, he tried to assault the son of the informant who fled away to save his life. It is further alleged that the said Baijnath Singh fled away after leaving the motorcycle. It is further alleged that with the help of the villagers the informant was taken to Taraiya Hospital where his treatment is going on. The reason of the alleged incident is the previous enmity.

7. On the basis of the aforesaid fardbeyan of the informant, a First Information Report being Taraiya P.S. Case No. 54/2009 dated 04.06.2009 has been registered under Sections 341 , 324 and 307 IPC against the sole accused Baijnath Singh. After completion of investigation, police submitted a charge-sheet bearing number 77/2009 dated 25.09.2009

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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