SHATRUGHAN RABIDAS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the intervening nights of 2nd/3rd April, 1995, while house inmates were fast asleep after taking their meals, it is alleged that some dacoits holding arms with them, scaling over the wall of the house, gained their access in the inner apartment of house of Dhananjay Kumar (P.W. 4). It was alleged that they took recourse to firing to scare house inmates, collected them in the courtyard and coercing them, relieved them of their house belongings/which include ornaments, wearing apparels, watches, utensils, etc. and decamped with the booty. The fardbeyan of Dhananjay Kumar, with these accusations, was recorded by Shri CD. Sharma, Sub INspector of Police of Noorsarai Police Station on 3rd April, 1995 at 6 a.m. at Sitarampur, pursuant to which first information report was drawn up and Police came into action. IN usual course of investigation, the Police recorded statement of witnesses, visited place of occurrence and got autopsy held over the dead-body of Chandrika Sharan Singh, who was shot dead by the miscreants, and eventually on conclusion of investigation, laid charge sheet before the Court. Though a good number of dacoits allegedly participated in the dacoity, only two of the house inmates Bijay Kumar (P.W. 3) and Dharmshila Devi, wife of Dhananjay Kumar, claimed identification of the appellant alone. IN the eventual trial, that commenced, the State examined altogether six witnesses, who were house inmates, the doctor, who held autopsy over the dead-body of Chandrika Sharan Singh and also the Police Officer, who investigated the case.

(2.) THE defence of the appellant before the Court below and also this Court had been that of innocence and explicit defence of the appellant was that he was not paid wages by the house owner where he was working for quite some time and on that account, there had been some quarrel, and hence false implication. No witness, however, was examined on behalf of the appellant. THE trial Court, on consideration of rival contentions raised at Bar and due regard being had to the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, recorded finding of guilt under Section 396 IPC against the appellant and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life.

(3.) CHANDRADEO Sharma (P.W. 5) the Sub Inspector of Police, who was the Investigating Officer, stated to have rushed to the place of occurrence on receipt of information about a dacoity with murder, having been committed in village Sitarampur. He stated to have recorded statement of Dhananjay Kumar (P.W. 4) and transmitted the same to Noor sarai Police Station for drawal of first information report. He stated to have prepared the inquest report and visited the place of occurrence which was the house of Dhananjay Kumar. Though the witness would admit to have not affected seizure of blood from the place of occurrence nor having effected seizure of any offending article from the house of the appellant after his apprehension, he would state to have noticed the lock of the trunk broken and also Godrej lying broken at the place of occurrence. Dr Mahendra Prasad Singh. (P.W. 6), who held autopsy over the dead-body of Chandrika Sharan Singh, noticed two lacerated wounds, one of which was on the left cheek which was the wound of entry, and the other wound was on occipital region, which was the wound of exit. These two injuries in the estimation of the doctor were sufficient to cause death and these injuries were caused by firearms. This is all the evidence that has been adduced on behalf of the State to lend assurance to the prosecution allegation about commission of dacoity in the house of Dhananjay Kumar and also participation of the appellant in the incident.