SHIV KUMAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 5th May 1992, passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram, in ST. No. 266 of 1984. The appellants were convicted under Section 365 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo R.I. for your years each.

(2.) The prosecution case originated on the fardbeyan of Gumani Singh, recorded by Sri D.P. Sharma, S.I. of Dawath P.S. (Rohtas) on 7th May 1982, at 1.30 p.m., wherein it was alleged that the informant's son Bhikhari Singh had gone to his School at 7.00 a.m. At about 9.00 a.m. 5-7 persons, armed with gun and rifle swooped upon the School and lifted the informant's son from the Class and carried him away. When the School students raised alarm, the informants villagers, namely, Kawal Singh, Ayodhya Singh, Godhan Singh, Rameshwar Singh also chased the kidnappers raising alarm throughout. One of the kidnappers separated from the group of kidnappers and fled away. The rest five persons carried ahead the victim boy. When the informant and his villagers approached the kidnappers at distance of 100 yards, the informant identified Shiv Kumar Yadav (appellant No. 1), who was carrying his son on his shoulders. Lok Nath Yadav (appellant No. 2) was also identified and he was wielding a rifle. Another person who was carrying gun was identified as Sri Niwas Yadav (appellant No. 3). Sri Niwas Yadav fired from his gun sighting the chasers. Godhan Singh received injuries from the fire opened by Sri Niwas Yadav. When villagers of Padariya-Chhatni gathered, raising alarm and Raj Narayan Singh, Mukhiya fired from his gun, the kidnappers left the victim toy, Thereafter, the kidnappers took to their heels and while flying, they kept firing. The cause of occurrence as given in the fardbeyan was that the informant had deposed against the kidnappers twice earlier in some cases. Shiv Kumar Yadav was also a conviction in case of dacoity. Other dacoity case was also filed in which the informant had identified Shiv Kumar Yadav and Lok Nath Yadav (appellants). Accused-appellants were threatening to kill the informants son, if he was not prepared to enter into a compromise in the cases pending against them accused-appellants.

(3.) The accused appellants had taken a defence of false implication on account of litigation between parties.