NARAIN SAHNI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant No. 1, Narayan Sahani, 2, Bhikhar Sahani, 3, Janki Sahani, they all have been convicted under Sections 148, 379 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code (short the IPC) and they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years under Section 307, IPC and one year under Sections 379, IPC and six months under Section 148, IPC. THE appellant 4 Jung Bahadur Sahani and 5, Sukhal Sahani, they were convicted under Sections 307,147 and 323 of the IPC and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years under Section 307, IPC three months under Section 323 and six months under Section 379, IPC. However, all the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution case in short is that the informant gave his fardbeyan at Chakiya State Dispensary on 20.2.1982 at 12.30 hours before the police alleging inter alia, that on 19.2.1982, he had gone to sugar-cane field situated at Bara Sareh at 4 p.m. He saw all the accused persons were making bundles of his "Khar" the informant enquired as to why they were making bundles of his "Khar" thereupon all the appellants started abusing the informant and uttered to kill him. THEn the appellant No. 1 Narayan Sahani gave a Farsa and appellant No. 3 Janki Sahni and appellant No. 2 Bhikhar Sahani gave Bhala and Farsa-blow. It has been alleged that the appellant Janki Sahani was carrying Bhala and he gave Bhala-blow on the leg and abdomen of the informant. THE appellant Bhikhar Sahani was armed with Farsa and he gave a Farsa-blow on the hand and head or the informant. THE other appellant Jung Bahadur Sahani and Sukhal Sahani were also armed with lathi and they assaulted the informant with lathi.

(3.) THE prosecution in support of its case examined altogether six witnesses. P.W. 1 is Sadhu Das, P.W. 2 is Pyare Sahani, P.W. 3 is Ramekbal Sah, P.W. 4 is Alha Sahani, the informant, P.W. 5 is Dr. Laxman Chaubey, the Medical Expert, who has examined the injured informant. P.W. 6 is Mangal Prasad Keshari, a formal witness. He has proved the first informant report, P.W. 3 although he is eye-witness, but he has not fully supported the prosecution case. According to him he saw only the accused Narayan Sahani on the place of occurrence assaulting the informant with Farsa on his head. He has clearly stated that he did not see other accused persons on the place of occurrence. In the cross-examination he has stated that he fled away just seeing the blood from the place of occurrence. P.W. 4, the informant has fully supported the case of the prosecution as stated in the First Informant Report. According to him on the date of occurrence he went to see his sugar cane plants in Bara Sareh and he saw all the appellants were making bundles of "Khar" and when he protested, all the appellants abused him and uttered that he would be killed. THEreafter, the appellant Narayan Sahani gave three Farsa blow on his head and appellant Bhikhar Sahani also gave three Farsa blow on his face and appellant Janki Sahani gave Bhala blow on his abdomen towards left side and also to his leg. He has also stated that the appellant Jung Bahadur Sahani gave lathi blow by which his finger was broken, thereafter, the appellant Sukhal Sahanj gave lathi blow on his back and leg, Having sustained injuries he cried and fell down. THEreafter the witnesses took him to Chakia Hospital, where he was treated. THE police came there and his fardbeyan was recorded in the hospital. According to him the field in which the occurrence took place was coming in his possession from the time of his ancestors. According to him the accused persons took away the Kher of five Kathas of the field. In his cross-examination he has stated that the field in which the occurrence took place were belonged to his grand father as per the Khatian, but he could not say the Khata number of that field. He has also denied that he has no knowledge that the accused Narayan Sahani has field any title suit in the Court of Munsif with regard to the field of place of occurrence against his father and the same was decided against his father. THE other witnesses P.W. 1, P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 they all have supported the version of the informant and they stated that the appellants assaulted the informant and thereafter, he was taken to hospital where he was treated.