RABINDRA SAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole appellant of this appeal has been convicted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

(2.) THE prosecution of the appellant was set at motion on the Fardbeyan of Md. Ghaffar of village Ram Sahar, P.S. Barhara, district Bhojpur. On 11.12.1991 at about 7.45 P.M. he stated before the Officer -in -charge of Barahara police station that his elder brother, Md. Ayub, had gone to Matukpur Bazar for selling bangles. While returning from Matukpur Bazar, he reached the outskirts of village Rampur Sahar at about 5.30 P.M. The appellant, resident of the same village, asked him as to why there was delay and whether the articles had been sold. Md. Ayub stated that bangles worth Rs. 1,200/ - were sold and proceeded ahead when the appellant gave knife blows on his chest and abdomen causing bleeding injuries. Md. Ayub fell down injured. Co -villagers Ramjash Dusadh and Akalu Ram reached there and saw the occurrence. He (Ghaffar) was informed about the incident by one Jag Narain Sah. When he reached the place he saw his brother lying unconscious in injured condition. A large number of persons had assembled there. His nephew Md. Hussain informed him that the appellant had given knife blows and fled away. Md. Ayub was taken to the Hospital on a cot. The compounder of the hospital referred him to one Dr. Sinha who later told that Ayub had died. The dead body was then taken to the police station where he made his Fardbeyan.

(3.) AT the trial the prosecution examined seven witnesses to prove its case, out of them P.W. 2 Md. Mahboob Alam was tendered while P.W. 4 Chandrakali Devi and P.W. 5 Rajmania Devi turned hostile. Among the remaining witnesses, informant (Md.) Abdul Ghaffar was examined as P.W. 1. Md. Sahabuddin who too claimed to have reached the place of occurrence and learnt about the same was examined as P.W. 7. Md. Hussain, son of the deceased and an eye witness, was examined as P.W. 3. Dr. T.N. Prasad who held autopsy was examined as P.W. 6. It would appear that out of these material witnesses, P.W. 1 Abdul Ghaffar and P.W. 7 Md. Sahabuddin were examined as hearsay witnesses. The only witness who claimed to have seen the occurrence is P.W. 3 Md. Hussain.