BHUNESHWAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the appellants have been convicted under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years each.

(2.) The prosecution case in short is that in the night between 12/13th of May, 1981 the informant went to sleep in his room. His wife and son Jagdip Chaudhary were sleeping in the courtyard at about 2 p.m. 13-20 persons came at his Darwaja, out of them 4-3 persons entered his room. They were armed with torch and dagger and the rest of dacoits who were standing at the Darwaja were pushing the entrance gate of his house. Some of the dacoits came near the informant and enquired about the property kept by him. He replied that he was a poor man and he had not kept any property. One of the dacoits who was armed with iron rod and torch began to assault him at his Panjara with the iron rod. The dacoits who were standing at the main gate of the house were threatening to shoot whoever would come near them. According to the informant he identified the dacoit who had assaulted him namely Mahendra Singh. It has been stated that the informant had seen this accused in the toddy shop which was situated near his house. Some of the dacoits entered into his house after breaking open the door and committed dacoity and looted silver ornaments, utensils clothes, watch bicycle and also Rs. 300.00 cash etc. At the time of commission of dacoity the son of the informant Jagdish identified Umesh Singh and Bhuneshwar Singh. They had surrounded Jagdish Chaudhary armed with Chhura and revolver. After committing dacoity for about 43 minutes they went towards south. While fleeing away they also took away one attache and four broken boxes which were kept in the courtyard. On the next day the informant went to Jalalpur P.S. where first information report was lodged on the basis of which investigation started and after completion of investigation charge sheet was submitted against the accused persons. Thereafter cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions where the trial concluded with the result as indicated above. The appellants pleaded not guilty.

(3.) The prosecution in support of its case examined altogether eleven witnesses. P.W. 1 is Girja Devi, P.W. 2 is Bindeshwari Chaudhary. P.W. 3 is Nirmala Devi, P.W. 4 is Jadip Chaudhary, he has been declared hostile. P.W. 5 is Ram Sobhit Paswan, he has not supported the case of the prosecution. P.W. 6 is Rajeshwar Pd. Singh, he is a formal witness. P.W. 7 is Dhanraj Rai, informant. He has also been declared hostile. P.W. 8 is Janki Devi. She has also been declared hostile, P.W. 9 is Phulendra Jha, he is a formal witness. P.W. 10 is Deo Raj Thakur. He is a formal witness and P.W. 11 is Sudhir Pd. Singh, a formal witness.