RAJENDRA PRASAD PATWA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.12.2003 passed in Sessions Trial No. 76 of 1999 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. HI, Bettiah, West Champran whereby he was convicted under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and he has further been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. It was ordered that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case, as arises from the fardbeyan of the informant Rabindra Prasad is that he is making statement on 3.4.1998 at 11.45 p.m.. at the veranda of one Yamuna Prasad near the dead body of his son Shrawan Kumar before the Sub- Inspector of Police of Chanpatia Police Station that on 3.4.1998 his son was playing near his house at Durga Mandir but he did not saw his son since 3.00 p.m. and then he started making out a search for him but he could not find out and thereafter, he went to announce on mike about missing of his son in the nearby area but could not find him out. At about half past seven in the evening when he returned to his house then at 8.30 p.m. one Neeraj Kumar (not examined) son of Vermajee came and informed that the son of the informant is sleeping the veranda of Yamuna Prasad. The informaint rushed there and found his son dead and found froth coming out from the nose of his son and on head, face and nose he found the injury of some hard blunt substance. On information the police came and on the sound of weeping and cry several people collected and one Ramesh Prasad son of Yamuna Prasad disclosed that when he came after closing his shop then he found a boy sleeping at veranda then he called the lantern from the wife of Vermajee and saw Shrawan Kumar lying there, whereas the fact is that ten minutes prior to that when Yamuna Prasad came on the veranda but he did not find Shrawan there. On cry several persons collected there but the neighbour Rajendra Prasad Patwa and his family members did not come there. The further case of the prosecution is that the house of Rajendra Prasad Patwa remained close and the informant doubted the complicity of Rajendra Prasad Patwa due to old enmity and then Deepak Kumar (PW 7), Mahabeer Prasad (not examined) and Pradeep Kumar (PW 2) got the door of Rajendra Prasad Patwa opened on which they found his bed wet and smell of urine from the bed. They also found a blue jersey concealed in wet condition. Jersey was seized and on inquiry about the jersey the appellant Rajendra Prasad Patwa and his daughter Dolly Kumari remained silent. It was doubted that Dolly Kumari and Rajendra Prasad Patwa the appellant might have killed the son of informant by hard blunt substance. It is further alleged that earlier due to some enmity Dolly Kumari had threatened to kill him. Further case is that Dolly Kumari ha.d committed theft in the house of Saral mali which was protested by the daughter-in-law of Yamuna Prasad. So it is doubted that the appellant Rajendra Prasad Patwa and Dolly Kumari might have committed the murder and thrown the dead body in the house of Yamuna Prasad to falsely implicate him.

(3.) On the basis of aforesaid Jardbeyan of Rabindra Kumar the FIR was lodged and after investigation charge-sheet was submitted. Consequently cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. After commitment the charges were framed under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and explained to the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.