The judgment established the importance of reliable witness testimony, the impact of vicarious liability under section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, and the need for specific evidence to establish guilt.

ORDER :

Shree Chandrashekhar, J.

The appellants of these criminal appeals have faced the trial for the charge under sections 302/149, 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

2. During pendency of these criminal appeals, Sanjay Yadav who is the appellant No. 2 in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 575 of 2012 passed away.

3. By an order dated 28th February 2023, IA No. 9898 of 2022 filed in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 575 of 2012 has been allowed and this criminal appeal qua Sanjay Yadav has abated.

4. In ST No.70 of 1998, the surviving appellants have been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life under section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code. Anil Yadav who is the sole appellant in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 580 of 2012 has been further convicted and sentenced to RI for 5 years under section 27 of the Arms Act.

5. Mahagama P.S. Case No. 64 of 1997 was lodged on the basis of the fardbeyan of Vinod Yadav recorded by the officer-in-charge of Mahagama Police Station at 09:20 AM on 16th August 1997 at village Dharmodih. The informant has stated in his fardbeyan that Anil Yadav, Lalan Yadav, Yogendra Yadav, Kailash Yadav, Jamri Yadav, Sanjay Yadav, Katki, Rajendra Yadav, Parmeshwar Yadav, Fuleshwar Yadav,Murlu Yadav and 15-20 other accused variously armed with lathi, bhala, farsa and Nalkatua (country-made firearm) suddenly started firing and in the occurrence his daughter died on the spot. In course of the investigation, complicity of other accused who were not named in the First Information Report has also transpired but most of them have remained absconder.

6. The prosecution case is that in the morning of 16th August 1997 a quarrel ensued between two groups of villagers. At that time, Anil Yadav and others started obstructing cremation of Tej Narayan Yadav insisting that the dispute regarding the land of Thakur Ji should be resolved first. Bechan Yadav has stated that Anil Yadav, Lalan Yadav, Kailash Yadav, Sanjay Yadav, Gunsagar Yadav, Mahesh Yadav, Sargun Yadav and Permanand were carrying masket/gun/country-made gun and Jawahar Yadav and Katki were armed with bhala and Permeshwar Yadav was wielding a lathi. All the prosecution witnesses except Satya Narayan Yadav have stated in unison that the accused persons started the quarrel and fired at the prosecution party.

7. A charge-sheet was laid against 11 persons out of whom 9 persons who are the appellants in these criminal appeals were put on trial.

8. To support the charge of forming an unlawful assembly with common object to murder Lata Devi and attacking Pramod Yadav with an intention to kill him, the prosecution has examined 9 witnesses during the trial. Except Dr. Dilip Kumar Choudhary who has tendered the evidence as PW9, the other witnesses happen to be co-villagers of Vinod Yadav PW7.

9. During the trial, these appellants have denied the charges framed against them for murder of Lata Devi and attempt to murder Pramod Yadav and have produced 3 witnesses in defence to prove their innocence. The defence set up by the accused is that there was a long-standing dispute and rivalry between two groups of villagers one led by Anil Yadav who is the appellant in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 580 of 2012 – the other group was of Fagu Yadav.

10. The trial Judge has held as under:

“18. The learned lawyer of the defence has argued that Lata was not killed by these accused persons rather she received injury fired from the goot of opposite party who are criminals and they have been convicted in two murder cases. Further the learned lawyer has argued that there was no intention or motive to kill Lata Devi of these accused persons because there was no enmity with Lata Devi with these accused persons. Further stated that out of 16 witnesses in charge-sheet only 9 witnesses have been examined by the prosecution. Therefore case of prosecution is totally doubtful. It has been also submitted that I.O of this