DANI SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these three appeals, arising out of the same judgment and order dated 19.7.1989 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Gaya in Sessions Trial No. 539 of 1985/41 of 1985 convicting and sentencing all the twenty four appellants before us to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, further convicting and sentencing appellants, namely, Lakhan Singh, Janardan Singh, Ram Janam Singh (appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 393 of 1989), Dani Singh, Raghu Singh, Ram Charitar Singh, Chandar Singh (appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 361 of 1989) to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and a fine of Rs. 3000/- each and again further convicting appellant Lakhan Singh to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 436, Indian Penal Code but ordering all the sentences to run concurrently and paying the amount of realised fine to informant by way of compensation, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The case of prosecution, in short, is that on 6.7.1983, informant Ramu Yadav (PW 11), after easing out, was returning to his house at about 8 a.m. and his uncle Kishun Yadav at that time also was returning to his house from the northen direction and he was ten yards ahead of informant. When the informant and his uncle Kishun Yadav reached in lane near the house of Sadhu Kahar, the informant saw a number of persons variously armed with saif, garasa, bhala, guns etc. coming out from the dalan of Bhuneshwar Singh who all challenged Kishun Yadav and attacked on him. Appellant Lakhan Singh, who was carrying a bag, took out a bomb from his bag and hurled it on Kishun Yadav causing injury on his back and Kishun Yadav, after receiving injury, anyhow managed to enter the house of his cousin Pheku Yadav (PW 6). Following him, all the appellants alongwith Biro Singh, Pragash Singh and Ram Singh (all the three since dead) alongwith 15 to 20 others, variously armed with saif, bhala, garasa, guns, entered the house of Pheku Yadav. The informant also, following the appellants and their companions, entered the house of his uncle Pheku Yadav (PW 6). In the meantime, Gopi Yadav, father of informant, also reached there and, thereafter, Gopi Yadav and Kishun Yadav both climbed on the matkotha (box room) in order to save their lives. Appellants Lakhan Singh, Ram Charitar Singh, Ram Janam Singh, Chhotan Singh, Raghu Singh, Balindra Singh, Manoj Singh, Bhola Singh, Baban Singh, Nandu Singh, Yadav Singh and ten to fifteen unknown persons also, alongwith weapons, climbed from outside on the roof of house and other appellants remained in the courtyard and verandah of the house. The appellants, who had climbed on matkotha, started assaulting Kishun Yadav and Gopi Yadav with guns, bhala, saif etc. The appellants, who had gone on the roof of the house, uprooted the tiles and bamboo sticks of matkotha and appellant Lakhan Singh, after sprinkling kerosene oil on the roof, set fire and, thereafter, the appellants, who had climbed on matkotha, brought down Kishun Yadav and Gopi Yadav to the verandah where they, after piercing garasa, bhala, saif, killed them. Thereafter, appellant Raghu Singh, Janardan Singh, Ram Charitar Singh, Ram Janam Singh, Dani Singh, Chander Singh, Lakhan Singh alongwith co-accused Biro Singh carried the dead bodies on a cot towards eastern side of village and other appellants, after scrapping the blood fallen on the ground, put it in a nearby well alongwith straw and they also washed the blood drops from the wall of the house by water and mud and, thereafter, they also went following the dead bodies of Kishun Yadav and Gopi Yadav. After some time, the informant saw smoke and flames of fire rising from the side of eastern boundary of his village and the appellants burnt the dead bodies by remaining at the place of burning for two hours and, thereafter, they agajn came back to the houses of informant (PW 11) and Pheku Yadav (PW 6) and took away rice, wheat, gram, clothes, ornaments, pots etc. The occurrence was witnessed by female members of the family of informant including his mother, aunt, sister, wife of brother of Pheku Yadav (PW 6) and number of villagers. Old enmity, giving rise to number of cases between the prosecution party and appellants, is said to be motive of the occurrence. The fardbeyan of informant was recorded on the day of occurrence at 8.30 p.m. by Sub Inspector Uzair Alam (PW 13). The informant, in his fardbeyan stated that because appellants did not allow him to leave the house, therefore, he could not go to the Police Station. On the basis of fardbeyan of informant, a case under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 201, 436, 380, Indian Penal Code, Section 27. Arms Act and Sections 3, 4, 5, Explosive Substances Act against all the twenty four appellants alongwith Biro @ Birendra Singh, Pragash Singh and Ram Singh and fifteen to twenty unknown was registered and police, after investigation, submitted charge- sheet against the appellants and Biro @ Birendra, Pragash Singh and Ram Singh. Charges under Sections 302/149, 201 and 380, Indian Penal Code were framed against the appellants and Biro @ Birendra Singh, Pragash Singh and Ram Singh and after trial, the appellants were found guilty and were convicted and sentenced, as indicated above. Biro @ Birendra, Pragash Singh and Ram Singh were also convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code and Biro Singh @ Birendra was further convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/- but during the pendency of this appeal, all the aforesaid three persons died.

(3.) The case of appellants is that on the day of occurrence, appellant Nawal Singh and Indu Singh were not present in the village. Their further case is that prior to alleged occurrence, two persons, namely, Sodhi Singh and Arjun Singh were murdered and after their murder, both the deceased of the present case, namely, Kishun Yadav and Gopi Yadav left the village-Malti alongwith their families for other village and on the day of occurrence, they were not living in the village-Malti and they were not murdered there and appellants were falsely implicated in this case on account of enmity. Four witnesses on behalf of the appellants were examined by the trial Court.