The prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to significant inconsistencies in testimonies and absence of key witnesses, leading to acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA, J.

Heard Mr. Madhav Jha, learned counsel for the appellant assisted by Ms. Kanchan Jha and Mr. A.M.P Mehta, learned APP for the State.

2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as ‘Cr.P.C’) challenging the Judgment of conviction dated 16.12.2005 and order of sentence dated 19.12.2005 passed in Sessions Trial No. 471 of 1990 / 68 of 2004 in connection with Araria P.S. Case No. 265 of 1989 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no.-V, Araria, whereby and where-under the appellant has been convicted for offence punishable under Sections 307 and 354 Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as “IPC”) and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the IPC and further undergo simple imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under Section 354 of the IPC. However, both the sentence shall run concurrently.

3. The case of the prosecution in brief, is that on 02.11.1989 at about 6 am informant Ramanand Tatma sent his son Dinesh Tatma to call accused Pradip Kumar Singh for inquiring into the facts as to why he misbehaved with his daughter on last Saturday. It is alleged that his another sin Indradeo Tatma accompanied with the other brother Dinesh Tatma. When the sons of the informant asked Pradip Kumar Singh to accompany with them to their house as his father has called him, accused refused to go there. Further, it is alleged that the informant went at the house of accused and he saw accused armed with pistol in his hand and pointing it towards his two sons. Informant asked the accused not to fire, but in the meantime, accused fired from his pistol but anyhow his sons escaped. It is alleged that informant along with his two sons caught the accused with pistol but accused after pushing them fled away. In the meantime, some villagers reached at the place of occurrence. The motive assigned for the alleged occurrence is that on last Saturday at 10 am while daughter of the informant was returning back from the house of one Giranand Singh with pacey on her head and reached near plantain trees, accused caught hold of her hand and tried to molest her and outrage her modesty but anyhow she escaped from his clutches.

4. On the basis of fardbeyan of the informant on 02.11.1989 at 10 am case was instituted and after completion of investigation, police submitted charge-sheet. Later on cognizance was taken and case was committed to the Court of Sessions.

5. On behalf of the prosecution, total 7 witnesses were examined to substantiate the charges leveled against the accused/appellant, out of them, PW-1 Hare Krishan Das, PW-2 Nakachedi Tatma, PW-3 Panchanand Das @ Tatma, PW-4 Nirmala Devi (victim), PW-5 Indradeo Tatma, PW- 6 Dinesh Kumar Tatma and PW-7 Ramanand Tatma (informant). On behalf of defence 3 witnesses have been examined, DW-1 Jageshwar Mandal, DW-2 Uma Shankar Tatma and DW-3 Bhumi Yadav.

6. PW-1 in his examination-in-chief stated that the occurrence took place 11 years ago around 6-7 am and he had gone in the east direction of the house for defecate and while returning from defecate he saw the accused going in the east direction. He saw both sons of Ramu Das chowkidar going to call the accused. When accused started to flee then both sons were chasing him. After some distance accused felt down on the ground then informant and his two sons caught him. He further stated that he saw a 3 nut in the hands of chowkidar. Chowkidar told him that he has recovered it from the possession of accused.