MITHILESH UPADHYAY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mithilesh Upadhyay, Dwarikanath Tiwary and Narbdeshwar Tiwary, the three appellants in these appeals and two others, namely, Gorakh Singh and Raghunath Singh were arraigned before the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram to answer charges under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act, The trial ended in conviction of all of them under Section 302/34, IPC and four of them (excluding Gorakh Singh) under Section 27 of the Arms Act, In appeals preferred by them the High Court set aside the convictions recorded against Gorakh Singh and Raghunath Singh but upheld the convictions of the three appellants. Hence these three appeals at their instance.

(2.) Briefly stated the prosecution case is that on January 1, 1989 at or about 12 noon Ajit Tiwary (the deceased) along with his minor daughter Kumari Sadh ana was proceeding from his house in village Kumhau within the police station of Sheosagar. On the way when they reached the house of Dwarikanath, he along with the other accused persons accosted them. Then on exhortation of the Gorakh Nath (since acquitted) Narbdeshwar fired at Ajit with a gun. When Ajit tried to run away to save his life Mithilesh fired at him with a rifle which hit him on the chest. Dwarikanath also fired from his rifle at the same time. Ajit then ran towards his baithak and fell down near the door. Chandradeep Tiwary (P.W. 6), a cousin of Ajit, Sudama Singh (P.W. 2), Paras Nath Tiwary (P.W. 4)), Rajeshwar Singh (P.W. 5) and one Mangal Singh (not examined), who were then on the roof of the house and had seen the firing, hurriedly came down. Carrying Ajit on a cot they then proceeded towards Sasaram for his treatment. However, by the time they reached the outskirts of their village Ajit succumbed to his injuries. Leaving the dead body of Ajit at the village gate under care of others Chandradeep went to Sheosagar police station and lodged a report. On that report (Ext. 4) a case was registered and Madhusudan Sharma (P.W. 7), the Officer-in-Charge of the police station took up investigation. He first went to the place where the dead body of Ajit was lying:and after preparing the inquest report sent it for post-mortem examination. Sri Sharma then went to the place of occurrence and seized blood from the baithak of Ajit. On completion of investigation the police submitted charge sheet and in due course the case was committed to the Court of Session.

(3.) The motive that was ascribed by the prosecution for the above murder was that there was a long standing dispute over property between the appellant Narbdeshwar and the family of Ajit.