PREMCHAND SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants have been convicted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life for having committed the murder of Ram Awadhesh Singh on 9.4.95 at about 6 AM near Village Chilharua within Dinara PS of Rohtastas district.

(2.) THE fardbeyan of the case was lodged by none else than the deceased himself in Dinara State Dispensary after about two hours of occurrence at 8 AM. He slated that at 6 O 'clock in the morning he had gone to the eastern outskirts of the village for answering the call of nature. His nephews Bir Bahadur Singh and Lalji Singh were with him. When he was returning after easing himself he was accosted by the appellants as well as Suraju Singh, Surendra Singh, Birendra Singh, Birendra Singh and Laxman Singh. All of them were armed with revolver. He tried to run away but was surrounded by them and at that point of time appellant Gyanchand Singh fired from his revolver which hit him on his chest. Appellant Premchand Singh also fired twice which hit him on his back. He fell down crying. On hearing his cries and shouts persons assembled and the culprits fled away. Ram Awadhesh Singh disclosed that prior to the occurrence they had been giving threats on account of dispute and for that reason with a common intention they shot him.

(3.) IT may be mentioned here that on the date fixed for judgment i.e. 13.4.98 it so happened that appellant Gyanchand Singh did not appear when his bail bond was cancelled and the judgment was delivered with respect to the accused in attendance i.e. appellant Premchand Singh. The trial as regards Gyanchand Singh was separated and numbered as Sessions Trial No. 481A/95. After Gyanchand Singh appeared on 25.4.98 the same very judgment was pronounced against him. The order on the point of sentence was passed on 28.4.98. If we may say so, it was open to the trial court to proceed with the delivery of judgmernt even against Gyanchand Singh in terms of proviso to Sub -section (6) of Section 353 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Be that as it may, there being two separate judgments, two separate appeals were required to be filed on behalf of the appellants but it is futile to go into that question inasmuch as the common appeal against both the judgments was entertained by this Court and has now come up for final hearing.