NAND KISHORE PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals have been filed against the judgment and order passed by 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Motihari in Sessions Trial No. 72/1991/91/1991. Altogether ten persons, who were standing trial in the aforesaid sessions case, have been convicted and sentenced todifferent terms of imprisonment by the learned Additional Sessions Judge by his judgment dated 29-2-1992 and the order dated 3-3-1992. It is significant to note that Cr. Appeal No. 160/92 was registered on the basis of a prisoner appeal filed on behalf of Sk. Zahirul Haque, one of the ten persons convicted by the trial Court, but prior to it Cr. Appeal No. 19/92 was already filed on behalf of all the ten convicts including the appellant of Cr. Appeal No. 160/92. By his order dated 29-2-1992 the learned lower Court convicted the appellants Akhilesh Prasad, Pradeep Prasad and Sk. Sanaullah of offence under S. 147, IPC and the other appellants Sk. Nasrullah, Sk. Zahirul Haque, Prahlad Rai, Hira Raut, Gopal Rai and Ganesh Prasad were convicted of offence under S. 148, IPC along with the appellant Nand Kishore Prasad. Further the appellant Nand Kishore Prasad has been convicted of offence under S. 27 of the Arms Act. All the appellants, however, have been convicted of offence under S. 302 read with S. 149, IPC. The appellants have been sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for life under S. 302 read with S. 149, IPC. The appellant Nand Kishore Prasad has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year under S. 148, IPC, and further R.I. for one year under S. 27 of the Arms Act. The appellant Akhilesh Prasad, Pradeep Prasad and Sk. Sanaullah have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months each under S. 147, IPC. The remaining appellants have also been sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year each under S. 148, IPC. The sentences have, however, been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) It appears that on 17th of October, 1989 at about 5-15 p.m. S.I. Sheo Chandra Chaufhary of Chauradano P.S. received information regarding a murder having been committed near Sripur Canal. Accordingly, he made station diary entry and proceeded for the P.O. along with the police party. On arriving at the place of occurrence the police officer found the dead body of one Ramswarup Singh lying smeared with blood. He also found blood fallen there on the ground. He then prepared inquest report (Ext. 5) in presence of the witnesses Surendra Chaudhary and Bishwanath Singh and proceeded to record the statement of the informant Bishwanath Singh in the Fard Beyan (Ext. 6). The informant stated in the Fard Beyan that on the same day he was returning from Chauradano Block to his home village Duhosuho within P.S. Chauradano in the District of East Champaran in the company of his brother Ramswarup Singh (deceased). This Ramswarup Singh happened to be the Up-Mukhiya of the Gram Panchayat concerned. They were proceeding towards their village on the pitch road known as Motihari Chauradano road. When at about 5 p.m. they reached near a brick kiln at a distance of about 50 years from Sripur Canal, he saw some persons standing on the road. Among them he identified Nand Kishore Prasad who was armed with gun and dagger; Akhilesh Prasad who was armed with iron rod; Ganesh Prasad being armed with iron hammer; Pradeep Prasad armed with iron rod; Sk. Nasrullah armed with dagger; Sk. Sanaulah armed with lathi; Sk. Zahirul Haque armed with dagger; Prahlad Rai armed with Bhala; Heera Raut armed with dagger, Gopal Rai armed with Kharia. They all belonged to village Duhosuho and Fatuha. As soon as the informant and his brother Ramswarup Singh (deceased) reached that place, all the abovenamed persons attacked them and they caught hold of Ramswarup Singh. Nand Kishore Prasad ordered to kill Ramswarup Singh saying that he was not joining Bihar Kishan Samiti and was opposed to their party. At this instigation all the accused persons started assaulting Ramswarup Singh with lathi, Chura, Kharia and the said Ramswarup Singh, the brother of the informant, sustained injuries and fell down. Thereupon Ganesh Prasad sat on his chest and started assaulting him with hammer on the chest. Further Akhileshwar Prasad put his feet on the neck of Ramswarup Singh and began to press it and also assaulted him with iron rod. According to the informant, Pradeep Prasad and Nasrullah assaulted the victim with rod and dagger and the remaining accused persons also assaulted the victim with the weapons in their hand. As a result of the assault Ramswarup Singh died on the spot. Further, according to the informant, Nand Kishore Prasad pointed a gun towards the informant and asked him to keep quite and the informant out of fear kept mum. However, Bindeshwari Singh, Surendra Singh and Yogendra Singh of village Duhosuho and Sheoji Singh of village Khairwa who were passing through the road, arrived in the meanwhile and the culprits fled away. Thereafter the Police Officer arrived and, as stated above, recorded the Fard Beyan of this informantand took investigation. The Police Officer challaned the dead body for Postmortem Examination and recorded the statements of the witnesses, after inspecting the P.O. On further completion of the investigation he submitted charge sheet in this case on which cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. The trial commenced before the 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, who framed charges against the accused persons and proceeded with the trial and after some witnesses were examined, the case was transferred to the Court of 4th Addl. Sessions Judge before whom the trial concluded and the abovementioned judgment and order were passed. It appears that in course of trial altogether eight witnesses were examined by the prosecution to prove the charges against the accused persons standing trial. Three defence witnesses have also been examined.

(3.) From the defence evidence the defence case appears to be that the appellants have been falsely implicated in this case out of enmity. It is stated that actually the said deceased Ramswarup Singh was killed in the forenoon of the alleged date of occurrence, i.e. 17-10-1989, by some unknown criminals and subsequently when the family members and the relations of the victim learnt about his murder, they arrived at the P.O. and after due consultation they falsely implicated the appellants in this case.