BASU SAHNI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the appellants have been convicted under section 452 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the Penal Code ') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each. Appellants Raj Kumar Sahni, Mahadeo Sahani and Chutiya Sahani have been also convicted under Section 324 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each. Appellants Sudama Sahani and Chutiya Sahani have been further convicted under Section 323 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each. Appellants Mahadeo Sahani, Raj Kumar Sahani and Chutiya Sahani have been further convicted under Section 148 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each and the remaining seven appellants have been also convicted under Section 147 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month each. However, the sentences passed under different counts against the appellants have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution in brief is that on 18.1.83 the duck of the informant was missing and he made enquiry from the appellant Sudama Singh about missing of the duck. The appellant expressed his ignorance about the missing of the duck. Thereafter the informant came back to his house along with his family members. It is alleged that at about 7.00 P.M. alt of a sudden a mob consisting of the accused persons armed with Bhala, Farsa and Lathi came there. It has been alleged that the appellant Mahadeo Sahani gave a Bhala blow on the thigh of the informant and appellant Chutiya Sahani gave a Lathi blow on him. On receiving injury the informant fell down. Thereafter the rest of the accused persons who were also armed with Bhala, Farsa and Lathi entered the house of the informant and assaulted his father Natai Mistry and fled away. It has been further stated that the injured were taken to Colgong Hospital where they were treated and the statement of the informant was recorded. On the basis of the statement of the informant a formal F.I.R. was registered. After completion of the investigation charge sheet was submitted, cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the court of sessions where the trial concluded with the result as stated above.

(3.) P . W. 1 the informant has stated that on the alleged date of occurrence he went in search of his missing duck to the house of appellant Sudama and he found that his duck was not there. He came back. According to him, in the evening at 7 P.M. when he and his family members were sitting in his house all the appellants having Farsa, Bhala and Lathi came and appellant Rajkumar gave a Farsa below, Mahadeo a Bhala blow and Sudama a Lathi blow on him. According to him, his father was also assaulted by the accused persons. According to him he identified the appellants in the electric light coming out from the house of Janardan.The other witnesses PWs. 2, 3, 4 and 5 they all have supported the case of the version of the informant (P. W. 1).