HARDEO RAI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The seven appellants of the two appeals were put on trial on Sessions Trial No. 144/1983 by framing charges under Sections 147 and 302 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur. Appellant Hardeo Rai was distinctly charged also under Sections 148 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code while being tried with other appellants by the learned Judge. All the appellants except Hardeo Rai were found guilty under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code and also Sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code. While directing the appellants to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life for committing the offences under Sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code the learned Judge did not inflict any sentence upon the six appellants except Hardeo Rai under Section 147 of the Penal Code. So far as appellant Hardeo Rai is concerned, he was found guilty also under Sections 148 and 324 of the Penal Code and while he was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months for his conviction under Section 324, Indian Penal Code, the learned Judge did not pass any sentence under Section 148, Indian Penal Code upon him. The two appeals question the above findings of guilt and sentences passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in the above noted Sessions Trial.

(2.) Put briefly, the prosecution case is that the two deceased Raj Mangal Bhagat, brother of the informant Gandhi Bhagat (P.W. 10), and Ratan Bhagat, 'bahnoi of the informant, were accompanying the informant while coming back from Bariyarpur Bazar and when the three reached the 'Bandh' situated at village Bariyarpur Mathiya, it is alleged that 8 accused persons including the 7 appellants named in the First Information Report emerged there and caught hold of the two deceased. The informant attempted to intervene to rescue the deceased persons but he was given allegedly a bhala blow by appellant Hardeo Rai and also assaulted by others with lathi The informant fled away out of fear. The two deceased were thereafter taken away by the accused persons into the angan of appellant Hardeo Rai and were killed there. The informant stated that he did not go into the said angan out of fear.

(3.) As regards the reason for commission of the offence the informant stated that bamboo of plough-man of appellant Hardeo Rai had been cut and Hardeo Rai had complained to the informant about it and this was probably the reason that the incident had occurred.