GURJA BEDIA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 9/11/1977 of the High court of Patna whereby conviction and sentences of the appellants for the offences under S. 302, 394 and 34, Indian Penal Code have been confirmed.

(2.) The three appellants are brothers. The deceased, Bigna Bedia, lived with his wife Sohagia Bedia and sons in village Karmatola. The incident happened on the night of 5/09/1968. Bigna was sleeping along with his son Jhalku in the verandah while Sohagia was sleeping along with Malku on cot. At about midnight, the intruders entered the house by cutting the tatti and attacked Sohagia and her husband. Bigna Bedia sustained fatal injuries and died instantaneously. Sohagia was injured. The intruders took away the utensils and two she-goats kept at one end of the verandah. Jiwan Bedia, the brother of the deceased, on being informed by Jhalku and Lalku about the incident reached the house and after making enquiries, he lodged the first information report at the police station at about 10. 00 a. m. in the next morning. The crime was registered against unidentified persons. In the course of the investigation these appellants were arrested and were finally chargesheeted.

(3.) There had been ill-feeling between the appellants on the one hand and the deceased and his wife on the other, though the appellants are the sons of the elder sister of Sohagia. The prosecution case is that a on account of enmity, the three appellants committed the crime. Sohagia claimed to be an eyewitness. According to this witness, the three appellants were armed. Gurja had a tangi, Birja had a lathi and Mukund had a pharsa. On entering the house Gurja and Birja dealt blows on Sohagia with the weapons they had. She got injured and cried. On hearing the alarm, the deceased was awakened from sleep and when he was trying to get up, all the three appellants left her and killed her husband. Public Witness 14 asserted that Gurja had been flashing a torch and that she had identified all the three appellants. She also stated that she became unconscious and regained consciousness only the next day when the police arrived at the scene. According to the prosecution, Public Witness 14 is the only eye-witness. Lalku and Jhalku who ran to the house of Public Witness 1 had not seen the assailants. The trial court accepted the testimony of Public Witness 14 corroborated by the medical evidence and other circumstances as the basis for the conviction. The High court agreed with the trial court in holding that the prosecution has succeeded to bring home the guilt of all the appellants.