LAWS(PAT)-2011-3-169

BITAN MIAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On March 31, 2011
Bitan Mian Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal was preferred originally by four appellants to challenge judgement dated 18.03.1993 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtas in Sessions Trial No.58/33 of 1985/88 by which the appellants had been found guilty of committing offences under Sections 304/34 and 323 IPC and each of them was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and six months respectively on the two counts. During the pendency of the appeal, appellants Bitan Mian and Gaffar Mian were reported dead and, as such, their appeals abated as may appear from order passed on 13.05.2010 by this Court.

(2.) The prosecution case in short was that the husband of the informant, namely, Noor Mohammad Mian(P.W.4)came out of his house to urinate in the night and on seeing him, accused Gafar Mian and Sattar Mian started abusing him and also accused him of throwing stone over the roof of their house. P.W.4 requested not to abuse him as he had just come out of his house to urinate and that he should first get confirmed, upon which all the accused persons started assaulting him with lathi. Mohalla people came to intervene in the assault and diffused the quarrel who ran away towards Tenduni Chowk and did not return in the night as a result of which, the P.W.8 got anxious, As per her story in the FIR, she went to inform her Dewar, Gazar Mian, who came and started enquiring from the accused persons as to the reason for which they had assaulted P.W.4. All the accused persons, thereupon started assaulting the deceased Gazar Mian with Chailas (split piece of wood) as a result of which Gazar Mian fell down unconscious. The informant (P.W.4) attempted to intervene but she was also assaulted and injured. The neighbouring people came and saw the occurrence whereafter, the injured was shifted to a doctor who referred him to P.M.C.H.

(3.) After investigation of the case by P.W.9, chargesheet was laid before the court for trial which ended in conviction of the four accused persons who had filed the appeal as noted earlier.