SHAMBHU SAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH the appellant along with Gauri Shankar Sah was prosecuted for the offence punishable under sections 307/34 and 448 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Gauri Shankar Sah was exonerated of all the charges, the appellant having not been found guilty of the charges framed against him, suffered conviction only under section 326 IPC and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years.

(2.) THE factual matrix. ''The prosecution was launched against the appellant and Gauri Shankar Sah on behest of Vinod Kumar Sah (P.W. 2) on accusation that on 25th August, 1987, at about 4 p.m. while appellant and Gauri Shankar Sah were removing bricks put in the courtyard to restrain the flow of water to their side, he registered protest, pursuant to which there was exchange of abuses between them and shortly thereafter, the appellant brought acid from his house and poured on him, causing burn injury on his left cheek. Fardbeyan of said Vinod Kumar Sah was recorded at Bhagalpur Medical College Hospital at 3.15 p.m. on 26th August, 1987 by Shri B.P. Yadav, A.S.I., on transmission of which first information report was drawn up at Amarpur Police Station on 3rd September, 1987, which is the sheet anchor of the prosecution case. Pursuant to drawal of the first information report, investigation commenced and during investigation, the Police Officer visited place of occurrence, recorded statement of the witnesses, secured injury report from Bhagalpur Medical College Hospital and on conclusion of investigation, laid charge sheet before the Court. In the eventual trial, that commenced against the appellants and Gauri Shankar Sah, the State examined altogether four witnesses including the injured, his uncle, the doctor and also the Police Officer. The . defence too examined one witness Noor Hasan (D.W. 1), ostensibly, to counter the allegations attributed to the appellant. Defence of the appellant both before the trial Court and before this Court had been plain denial of the entire allegation and he scribed false implication. The explicit defence of the appellant was that it was Vinod Kumar Sah who was removing bricks from the courtyard and when protest was registered by the appellant, he wanted to throw acid on him which incidentally happened to fall on his own person and it is how that he suffered injuries. The trial court on appreciation of evidences placed on the record on behalf of both the parties, while negativing the contentions raised at Bar, on behalf of the appellant, recorded verdict of guilt against the appellant and sentenced him in the manner stated above, which is now being challenged in this appeal.

(3.) NOW adverting to the evidences placed on the record, one would find Vinod Kumar Sah (P.W. 2) reiterating his earlier version, which he rendered before the Police about he having registered protest when the appellant and Gauri Shankar Sao began to remove bricks from the courtyard which had been put there to restrict flow of water to his side. He would state about the appellant having thrown acid on his person when he suffered injury on his forehead and cheek and the narration made by Mahendra Sao (P.W. 1) was in tune with the testimony of P.W. 2 about the appellant having poured acid on the person of Vinod Kumar Sao. Though some other persons including Sunil Babu and Parmeshwar Babu were also suggested to have flocked at the place of occurrence, regard being had to the fact that the incident occurred inside the courtyard of the house, possibility of independent witness would not constitute any legal infirmity in the prosecution case and that apart, the positive statement rendered by P.Ws. 1 and 2 would receive ample corroboration from the finding of the doctor who noticed corresponding injuries on the person of the injured. It was a burn injury caused by throw of acid and that too was grievous in nature. True it is that dimension of the injuries was not expressed in so many words in the injury report, the doctor has noticed disfiguring of the face and hence, came to the conclusion about the injury to be grievous in nature. The Police Officer who visited the place of occurrence found stack of bricks in the courtyard put to restrict the flow of water towards western part of the courtyard which was in possession of the informant.