AKALU AHIR Vs. RAMDEO RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by special leave. The three appellants and one Ramchander Kanu were tried in the court of the 2nd Assistant Sessions Judge, Chapra for offences under Sections 307 and 307/109, I. P. C. Akalu Ahir and Chandrika Singh were charged under Section 307, I. P. C. for firing pistol shots and gun shots at Ramdeo Ram at 11.00 p. m. on June 13, 1966, whereas Jagarnath and Ramchander Kanu were charged under Sections 307/109, I. P. C., for having abetted the commission of the aforesaid offence.

(2.) The occurrence is stated to be an off-shoot of election rivalry arising out of the election for the office of Mukhia of village Arakpur. Indeed the enmity between the two rival groups was of long standing and is not denied. But enmity as usual is a double-edged weapon, providing motive both for the offence as well as for false implication. The evidence in such a case has, therefore, to be scrutinised with care so that neither the guilty party wrongly escapes on the plea of enmity, nor an innocent person gets wrongly convicted on that basis.

(3.) In this case there were three eye witnesses. Ramdeo Ram, the victim of the fire shots, appeared as P. W. 1, Fuljharia as P. W. 9 and ploughman Bhuidhar Chamar as P. W. 10.. The trial Judge after considering the evidence on the record felt no doubt about the fact that Ramdeo Ram had been injured by gun shots, but he did not feel impressed by the prosecution evidence with respect to the manner in which the occurrence had taken place, with the result that in his opinion, the prosecution had not been able to prove the charges against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt.