TARAK NATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants were convicted by the Sessions Court for committing the offence punishable u/s. 307 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years. Appellant Tarak Nath Singh was also convicted under Ss. 25 and 27 of the Arms Act and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one and three years respectively. The High Court confirmed the conviction of the appellants u/s. 307 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code but reduced the sentence to rigorous imprisonment for eight years. Conviction of Tarak Nath Singh under Ss. 25 and 27 of Arms Act was set aside. Aggrieved by the conviction and the order of sentence the appellants have filed this appeal by special leave.

(2.) What has been found against the appellants is that on April 23, 1979 at about 10.30 p.m. when Ramashish Singh was examining his account books and counting money in his 'Gaddi' (place of business) the appellants with four or five unknown persons entered the 'Gaddi' with revolvers, knives and bombs, Tarak Nath Singh fired six rounds from his revolver and caused injuries to Ramashish Singh and Chhabi Nath (appellant No. 2) stabbed him with a knife on his abdomen. After attacking Ramashish Singh in this manner the assailants had escaped after hurling bombs.

(3.) Both the courts below have believed the evidence of Ramashish (PW-1) and also of PWs-2, 3, 10 and 11. Shewnarayan (PW-2) was the owner of a nearby tea stall, Lalan Tewari (PW-3) was a passer bye, Ganga Prasad (PW-10) was an employee of Ramashish and Birendera (PW-11) is the son of Ramashish. All of them rushed to his 'Gaddi' on their attention being attracted by the sound of firing of shots and explosion of bombs and also by the alarm raised by Ramashish. All these witnesses had stated that soon after reaching there they were informed, by Ramashish that he was attacked by Tarak Nath Singh (appellant No. 1), Chhabi Nath (appellant No. 2) and four to five unknown persons. The trial court held that the evidence of Ramashish was corroborated by the medical evidence and also by the evidence of the aforesaid witnesses. It, therefore, convicted the appellants as stated above.