JADU SAHANI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the High court of Patna, dated 13/9/1995 passed in Cri. Appeal No. 340 of 1985,

(2.) Broadly stated, the case of the prosecution was that a swarm of people went in the area of the village of the complainant party in order to catch fish from a pond. Their number was considerable. The complainant party objected to those people entering into the fish pond in order to catch fish and challenged them to show any title to the pond or to fishing rights. This led to an exchange of unseemly words between the posted factions. There arose a clash; as a result of which two persons on the complainant side and one person on the accused side met his end, and a large number of people were otherwise injured. The matter was reported to the Police by bindeshwari Singh, PW-14, which set the investigation into motion. Two cross-cases were put up by the investigation for trial. The faction of the present accused lost in both cases. Their conviction and sentence as recorded by the court of Session for offences under S. 302, 302/149, 302/34,307/34 and 148 Indian Penal Code were confirmed by the High court in appeal. Details of various sentences awarded thereunder are disclosed in the orders of the court of Session which have been affirmed by the High court.

(3.) The sole point worth consideration in this appeal is, whether there arose an unlawful assembly, the common object of which was to go on a killing spree or was it an unlawful assembly the common object of which was in any manner different. It may be noticed that prior to the instant occurrence, there was no cause of friction between the two parties. The accused persons had come at the spot duly armed though not with a purpose of causing any injury to any human being but had, as is usual with the villagers, carried weapons while out on a fishing sport. It is a different matter that they were objected to and heated words were exchanged by the parties. We cannot conceive that the unlawful assembly which grew up spontaneously had the sole object of causing murders but it can be ruled instantly that the common object of the assembly was to cause assault on the complainant party. The degree and gravity of assault would have tobe gauged in this background. It then transpires that the sole fatal injury on Ram Udgar Singh, deceased, was attributed to Laxmi Yadav by means of an arrow and the sole injury on Biku singh, deceased, was attributed to Jadu Sahani, again by means of an arrow. The respective arrows with wooden handles were detected on post mortem examination of both the deceased. Therefore, it logically follows that Laxmi Yadav and Jadu Sahani were individually guilty for offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code each and we find that they had rightly been convicted for offence of murder, though with the aid of Section 149 Indian Penal Code. A slight correction, therefore, would have to be made to make them individually liable for the offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code substantively. Their respective sentences of life imprisonment. would, therefore, have to be affirmed. It is so ordered.