BHUSHAN RAI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two appellants were put on trial for the offences under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Begusarai, in Sessions Trial no. 83 of 1981 / 65 of 1981 by judgment dated 27th July, 1988. The learned trial Judge held the appellants guilty of committing the above offences. Besides, appellant Bhushan Rai, who had also been charged under Section 324 and appellant Kusheshwar Rai who had been charged under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code in addition to the above charges, were found guilty of committing the two offences but no separate sentence was inflicted on the two appellants for their respective convictions.

(2.) The prosecution story, as contained in Exhibit-3 the fardbayan of Ram Chandra Singh (P.W.8) is that he had gone out into his fields to take stock of the crops by a bicycle and when he had come to the field, which was situated by the road side in Sundaha Bandh, the two appellants along with absconding accused Jitendra Rai, came near him to complain that the informant was unnecessarily trying to harass them by implicating each of them in the incident of killing a goat belonging to one Nanku Paswan. The informant replied that the goat neither belong to him nor he had to do anything with the alleged implication of the accused persons and proceeded by his bicycle further from that place. It was alleged further by P.W.8 that when the above exchange of words was taking place, P.w.9, Gouri Kant Rai, and Dineshwar Rai (not examined) also came there.

(3.) The informant alleged that when he had peddaled up to five to six yards away of the place by his bicycle, absconding accused Jitendra Rai fired a shot on his back as a result of which he fell down there. Other shot was fired by appellant Bhushan Rai which hit the informant at his neck while the third shot was fired by appellant Kusheshwar Rai with his pistol which hit his left hand. The informant stated that he shouted upon which appellant Kusheshwar Rai stated that the appellants should be beheaded and his head should be taken away. However, on account of the presence of P.W.9, Gauri Kant Rai and Dineshwar Rai and also appearance of many other villagers, who came near the informant, the three accused persons ran away from there. The informant lost his consciousness and when he regained it, he gave the fardbayan (Exhibit-3) on the basis of which first information report (Exhibit-4) was drawn.