LAWS(PAT)-2001-6-51

BIHARI MEHTA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On June 29, 2001
Bihari Mehta Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole appellant, Bihari Mehta, has filed this Criminal Appeal against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Purnea, in Sessions Trial No. 255 of 1990, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted the accused appellant under Sections 302 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo RI for life under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. No separate sentence has been passed for the offence under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) In short, the case of the prosecution is that on the date of occurrence i.e., 7th August, 1989, at about 9.00 a.m., informant, Kishore Kumar Mehta, heard that there was a photography in the house of Rameshwar Mehta and he along with deceased Shyam Kumar Mehta went there. While the informant and Shyam Kumar Mehta (deceased) were sitting in the Angan accused appellant Bihari Mehta armed with rifle came there and pointed it on Shyam Kumar Mehta and told him that his father is earning huge amount in the business and then he (accused) fired his rifle on him (Shyam Kumar Mehta) causing injury on his head and bullet passed through his panjara. The informant was also injured by the bullet. On hulla Raj Kishore Mehta, Ganesh Mehta and Om Prakash Mehta and others came and look the injured Shyam Kumar Mehta to the hospital for treatment. The fardbeyan of the informant was recorded by the SubInspector of Police, R.J. Bhagat, the Officer-in-Charge of Murliganj Police Station on the same day at 10.00 a.m. On the basis of the fardbeyan (Exhibit 1) of the informant the formal FIR was drawn in this case. After investigation police submitted charge-sheet against the accused appellant and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the case and thereafter the case was committed to the Court of sessions for trial.

(3.) The defence of the accused according to the trend of the cross examination of the prosecution witnesses, is that he has been falsely implicated in this case.