LAWS(PAT)-1992-2-25

HIRA LAL SHAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On February 28, 1992
HIRA LAL SHAH; MAHABIR PRASAD; RAJA GOPE ALIAS LANGRA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -these appeals arise out of a judgment of conviction and sentence dated 4-6-1987 passed by Sri P. Xess VIIIth Additional Sessions judge. Patna in Sessions Trial No. 796/86. By reason of the impugned judgment, the satd learned court has convicted the appellants, Mahabir Prasad Sah @ Mababir Prasad Gupta. Kameshwar Prasad gupta and Sanjay Prasad Gupta (Appellants in Cr. Appeal no- 279/of i987) and Hira Lal Sah (Appellant in Cr. Appeal No. 302 of 1987) under Sections 302/34, 342/34 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and three months on each counts under Sections 342/34 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, respectively.

(2.) The learned court below also convicted Raju Gope and Langra (since deceased) for commission of an offence under Section 302 of the Indian penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life as also under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced him to undergo 5 years rigorous imprisonment on that count.

(3.) One Rajendra Prasad Sharma (P. W. 7) gave his ferdbeyan at 10 p. M. on 3-3-1986 before the Officer-in-charge of the Khagaul Police Station, in relation to an incident which allegedly took place at 9 P. M. on that date, alleging Inter alia therein that his father Mishri Lal Tiwari (deceased) and mahabir Prasad (a retired T. T. ) purchased a bouse having separate shares therein and have been in - possession of the portions which fell in there respective shares, on 3-3-1986 at about P p m. when he returned home efter looking after his bus-business, the appellants of Cr. Appeal Nos. 279 of 1987 and 302 of 1987 came to his house and asked him to vacate one of the rooms alleging that the same fell in their share but the informant refused to do so stating that the portion of the house which was in their occupation had fallen in his share and further allegedly in terms of the deeds of sale he would be entitled to some more land which is in possession of the appellants of Cr. Appeal no- 279 of 1987.