RAMA CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Appeal (DB) No.336 of 1995 is filed by accused no.1 Hari Chaudhary, accused no.2 Laxman Chaudhary, accused no.3 Rama Chaudhary, accused no.4 Akhlesh Chaudhary, accused no.6 Bharat Chaudhary and accused no.7 Rajan Chaudhary. Criminal Appeal (DB) No.353 of 1995 is filed by accused no.9 Prasadi Choudhary. The appellants/accused, by these appeals are challenging the Judgment and Order dtd. 15/9/1995 and 16/9/1995 respectively passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Katihar, in Sessions Case No.267 of 1991, wherein in all 9 accused were put on trial. Two out of them, i.e., accused no.5 Ranjeet Choudhary and accused no.8 Rohit Choudhary came to be acquitted by the learned trial court. That is how, the remaining 7 accused are before this Court in the instant appeals.

(2.) The facts leading to the prosecution of the accused projected from the police report can be summarized thus:

(3.) We have heard Mr. Amish Kumar and Mr. Prabhakar Thakur, the learned Advocates appearing for the appellants/accused. It is argued on behalf of the appellants that the evidence adduced by the prosecution is scanty and lacunic. There is no iota of evidence to infer formation of an unlawful assembly with a common object as alleged by the prosecution. On the contrary, evidence on record shows that the tree was on the land of the accused persons. It is further argued that there cannot be any application of Sec. 149 of the Indian Penal Code to the case in hand and even the appellant/accused Prasadi Choudahry cannot be convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code. There was no intention to commit the murder of the deceased. As against this, Ms. Shashi Bala Verma and Mr. Manish Kumar No.2, learned Prosecutors appearing for the Respondent-State supported the impugned Judgment and Order of conviction and sentence by stating that there are eye witnesses to the incident in question and the evidence of the prosecution is trustworthy and reliable.