The court reaffirmed that the prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and inconsistencies in witness testimonies warranted the benefit of doubt, leading to acquittal of the accused.

JUDGMENT :

(ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J.)

1. This appeal was initially filed by four of the appellants, namely, Shivnath Ray, Lakhan Deo Ray, Manoj Ray and Ram Pukar Ray but during the pendency of the appeal, one of the appellants, namely, Lakhan Deo Ray (appellant no. 2) died.

2. The appeal with respect to appellant no.2/Lakhan Deo Ray, therefore, abates.

3. We have heard Shri Ajay Thakur, the learned Advocate for the appellants and Mr. Akash Raj, the learned Advocate for the informant. The state is represented by Mr. Dilip Kumar Sinha, the learned APP.

4. The three appellants have been convicted for the offences under Sections 302 /34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE vide judgment dated 01.07.2016 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge -IV, Vaishali at Hajipur in Sessions Trial No. 326/2011 arising out of Patepur P.S. Case No. 150/2010. By order dated 12.07.2016, they have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Sections 302 /34 IPC.

5. One Mahendra Ray is said to have been killed at the hands of the appellants and others.

6. However, the Trial Court has acquitted the other accused persons for paucity of evidence.

7. The F.I.R. was lodged by Ganeeta Ray (PW7), one of the daughters of the deceased on 19.11.2010 at about 12 o’ clock in the day in PMCH. According to her, about five months ago, her father (deceased) had given a loan of Rs. 10,000/- to his brother Lakhan Deo Ray (since dead) for purchase of a buffalo. At about 5 o’ clock on 18.11.2010, when the said money was demanded back, the deceased and aforenoted late Lakhan Deo Ray started fighting amongst themselves. At about the same time, the appellants and others belonging to the same family arrived at the house of PW7 and started assaulting her father. Both his legs were fractured and he received severe injuries on his head. Many persons of the village started assembling at the P.O. Her father was then taken to the private clinic of one Dr. R.P. Mishra (not examined) from where he was referred to PMCH. During the course of treatment, her father died on 19.11.2010 in the morning.

8. Based on the afore-noted fardbeyan statement of PW7, Patepur P.S. Case No. 150/10 dated 25.11.2010 was registered for investigation under Sections 147 , 149, 341, 323, 325 and 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE .

9. Be it noted that the fardbeyan was recorded by ASI M.M. Ram of Pirbahore Police Station in the district of Patna, the reason being the death of the deceased taking place at PMCH. The fardbeyan was then forwarded to the SHO of Patepur Police Station for registration of a regular case.

10. The postmortem examination was conducted on the deceased at 1.10 P.M. on 19.11.2010 by Doctor Arvind Kumar (PW10). Ante-mortem injuries were found on the parietal region of the deceased. As an impact of the assault on head, there were swelling, abrasions and contusions over the upper part of the body. The lips had gone inside the denture. There was fracture of tibia and other bones. On further dissection, the scalp was found to be completely macerated. The temporal, parietal and occipital bones were fractured. There was extradural and subdural haematoma found all over. The injuries were opined to be ante-mortem and caused by hard and b