SAHDEO YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence respectively dated 18th August 2003 and 22nd August 2003 of the Additional Sessions Judge cum-Fast Track Court, Munger passed in Sessions Trial No. 60 of 1986, Tr. No. 206 of 2002, G.R.No. 1089 of 1984 (arising out of Sikandra P.S.Case No. 194 of 1984 whereby the appellant Sahdeo Yadav has been convicted under sections 302 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code and respectively sentenced to R.I. for life and a fine of Rs.2,000/- (Two thousand) and in default of payment of fine, he has been further sentenced to undergo S.I. for six months and R.I. for 2 years. Both the sentences are to run concurrently.

(2.) At the very out set it is relevant to mention here that one Bhunna Yadav had also been convicted under Sections 323 and 147 of the Indian Penal Code, but regarding the sentence, he was released after admonition under section 360 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He does not appear to have filed any appeal. It has also to be mentioned here that besides Bhunna Yadav, two other accused, namely Prayag Yadav and Rajeshwar Yadav have been tried for the charges under sections 147 and 302 read with Section 149 and 449 of the Indian Penal Code, but due to lack of exact and specific evidence, they were acquitted of the charges by the trial court.

(3.) The prosecution commenced with the fard-beyan (Ext-4) of the informant Swarath Singh (P.W.5) which was recorded by S.I. R.B. Das of Jamui Police Station in Sub-divisional Hospital, Jamui on 14th December 1984 at 2:20 P.M. where the informant was treated and the deceased Harkhu Singh had also been brought for treatment. The informant stated in his fard-beyan that yesterday (13th December 1984) in the night, the appellant Sahdeo Yadav along with some others was stealing away the paddy bundles from the Khalihan of Parmeshwar Singh and his (informants) nephew had protested to it as a result of which Sahdeo Yadav had threatened him of dire consequences. Further it is stated that on that day (14th December 1984), at about 8:00 A.M., while he (informant) and his old father Harkhu Singh (deceased) had been sitting at their Darwaja, suddenly Sahdeo Yadav, carrying a Saif and Prayag Yadav, Bhunna Yadav, Rajeshwar Yadav, Bulak Yadav, Raghu Yadav and Janki Yadav carrying Lathi came there and they asked as to where Lakshman Singh was and that making this enquiry, they proceeded towards the Angan of the house. The deceased replied that Lakshman Singh was not there and thereafter, the informant and the deceased tried to prohibit the accused persons in entering into the house whereupon Bulak exhorted to kill as a result of which Bhunna Yadav assaulted the informant with Lathi. The informant, receiving Lathi blow fled towards west and stood apart at a distance. The deceased being an old man was not able to flee away from there as a result of which the accused persons surrounded him and started beating him (deceased) and the appellant, assaulted on his (deceaseds) head with Saif (Saif is a heavy weapon like sword pointed at one end and sharp blade on both sides). On receiving injuries, the deceased fell down and thereafter one of the accused stated that he (deceased) had been killed and then they went away saying that Lakshman Singh had to be searched for settling the scores with him. The informant stated that witnesses Murari Singh (P.W.2), Bhola Singh (P.W.3), Ravindra Singh (P.W.1) and others had seen the occurrence. The informant also stated that with the help of villagers he had brought the deceased to Jamui Hospital where he was being treated, but the deceased was unconscious and his condition was precarious. It is said that the deceased died in Jamui Hospital. The informant identified his signature on the fard-beyan which was marked Ext-1. The writings containing assertion in the fard-beyan was marked Ext-4. On the basis of the fard-beyan, formal F.I.R. (Ext-5) was registered. The inquest report (Ext-6) of the dead body was prepared and the investigation commenced. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against four accused persons who were put on trial and out of them, the appellant has been convicted and sentenced, as stated above.