GUDDU RAI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The aforesaid appellants, except appellant Gautam Rai, have challenged the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 6.10.2007 and 12.10.2007, respectively, passed by learned 1st Additional District & Sessions Judge, Gopalganj in Sessions Trial No. 40 of 2004/53 of 2005, whereas appellant Gautam Rai of Criminal Appeal No. 940 of 2009 has challenged the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 9.9.2009 and 11.9.2009, respectively, passed by learned 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Gopalganj in Sessions Trial No. 83 of 2006/192 of 2008. The appellant Gautam Rai was separately convicted, since he absconded at the time of defence argument, but his appeal has also been heard alongwith appeals of other convicts, since the same evidence has been the basis of-conviction in both the trials. The five appellants of Sessions Trial No. 40 of 2004/ 53 of 2005 were convicted under Sections 302/34 & 387/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo RJ. for life with fine of Rs. 5,000/-each for charge under Section 302/34 of the IPC, R.I. for seven years with fine of Rs. 1,000/- each for charge under Sections 387/34 of the IPC and R.I. for three years with fine of Rs. 500/- each for charge under Section 27 of the Arms Act. Appellant Guddu Rai was further convicted under Section 379 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years with fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of making payment of fine, each appellant was directed to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) The appellant Gautam Rai was convicted under Sections 302/34 & 387/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life under Sections 302/34 of the IPC, R.I. for seven years under Section 387/34 of the IPC and R.I. for three years under Section 27 of the Arms Act. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(3.) The prosecution case emanates from the fardbeyan of Ravindra Pandey (P.W. 1) recorded on 13.7.2011 (sic 2001?) at 7.00 A.M. at Primary Health Centre, Kuchaikot by S.I., Mithilesh Kumar Das, Officer-in-charge of Kuchaikot Police Station (P.W. 12), to the effect that apart from performing agricultural work, the informant's side used to run a brick-kiln. Guddu Rai demanded fifty thousand bricks as extortion four months prior to the occurrence, which was refused by the informant, on which threatening was given by Guddu Rai. But the informant did not convey about the demand to anybody as it would cause fear within his family, but he became cautious. It has been admitted by the informant that there are three licensed arms in the family and on 13.7.2011(s/c2001?), at 5.15 A.M., the informant had gone to the brick-kiln which was situated 1000 yards north to his house and then at around 5.30 A.M., all of a sudden Guddu Rai, Hriday Rai, Gautam Rai, Dharmanath Rai and 7-8 unknown criminals came with automatic and ultra modern arms on five motorcycles and conveyed to the informant that as he had not fulfilled the demand of fifty thousand bricks, hence, now he will have to give Rs. Two lacs in addition to the fifty thousand bricks or he should remain prepared to die, on which some hot exchange took place. In the meantime, on hearing the alarm of the informant, the father of the informant, Durga Pandey (deceased), came to save informant with the licensed arm of the uncle of the informant. In the meantime, Hriday Rai, Gautam Rai hiding behind the sisam tree and the other accused hiding in the cane field, started firing indiscriminately on the father of the informant, while two unknown criminals caughthold of the informant and then Guddu Rai and Dharmanath Rai fired upon the father of the informant with AK-47 and semi-rifle, respectively. On receiving the gun shot injuries the father of the informant fell down and then Guddu Rai came near the father of the informant, while firing upon him and snatched the rifle of the father of the informant and filed away alongwith his associates. In the meantime, the informant escaped, after getting himself released from the clutches of criminals, but in the course of freeing himself, the informant received injury on being assaulted by the criminals, with the butt of the rifle. The informant did not identify others, but claimed to identify, on seeing them. The criminals were in the age group of 30-35 and were speaking local language and some of them were not armed. After the criminals fled away, the informant brought his father to Primary Health Centre, Kuchaikot with the help of the villagers, where his father was declared dead. The informant also came to know that prior to the occurrence, Guddu Rai had tea in the house of Dharmanath Rai and from there itself he traced about the activity of the informant and when they came to know about the informant's going to the brickkiln, the accused persons committed the offence. It was claimed by the informant that occurrence was seen by many villagers and by many people around the brickkiln, but these persons did not come forward to say anything, out of fear. The whole occurrence took place within five minutes. It is also claimed by the informant that his father was killed, as he did not pay the extortion money. Gyanendra Pandey (P.W. 4) was the attesting witness to the fardbeyan, when ultimately Kuchaikot P.S. Case No. 71 of 2001 was registered on 13.7.2001, at 9.00 A.M. under Sections 384, 386, 387, 302, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act, against four accused namely Guddu Rai, Dharmanath Rai, Hriday Rai and Gautam Rai.