PRAVESH GOPE Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THERE are eight Appellants in all in these two appeals. They have been convicted 2/f 1or /201c 3 om Pa m geit 2t1 ing 8 murder of Raj Kumar Gope of village Pakri within Karai Parsurai Police Station of Nalanda district on 29.6.1987 at about 5 p.m. While seven Appellants of Cr. Appeal No. 162/98 have been convicted under Section 302/149 and sentenced to imprisonment for life, the sole Appellant of Cr. Appeal No. 269/98 has been convicted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life. All of them have also been Shambhu Singh Versus State Of Bihar convicted under Section 148 of the Penal Code but no separate sentence has been awarded thereunder.

(2.) JAGDISH Gope, father of Raj Kumar Gope, reported the occurrence to SI Ram Vyas Singh of Karai Parsurai PS at 6.30 p.m. on the date of occurrence i.e. 29.6.1987 at the bank of river Lokain on the outskirts of village Pakari where murder is said to have been committed. He stated in the fardbeyan that he had asked his son Raj Kumar to bring the she -buffalo which had gone towards the river side while grazing. When Raj Kumar reached at the place of occurrence the Appellants a"med with guns and farsa came out of the maize field of one Nanhku Bhagat along with 10 -15 others and attacked him. Raj Kumar tried to flee away, however on the order of Appellant Naresh Gope, Appellant Chandrika Gope fired from his gun causing injury to Raj Kumar, other Appellants also fired simultaneously. On hearing the sound of gun fire witnesses rushed to the place and the Appellants fled away. The informant along with others went near Raj Kumar and found two gun shot injuries -one on the chest towards right side of arm -pit and the other on the left side of the chest. Jagdish Gope alleged that the cause of occurrence was altercation which had taken place two days ago between the Appellants and Raj Kumar. On the above said statement of Jagdish Gope Hilsa (Karai) PS Case No. 157/87 was registered against the Appellants. The case was investigated by SI Ram Vyas Singh who after completing necessary formalities submitted chargesheet and the Appellants were thus put on trial.

(3.) SHRI Tara Kant Jha, learned Counsel for the Appellants submitted that there are discrepancies in the fardbeyan version of the informant and his evidene in court and from the evidence of P.W. 1, 2 and 3 it would appear that all of them, indeed the informant too, had reached the place of occurrence after the occurrence was over and the Appellant had fled away. Shri Jha placed the evidence of the witnesses at length. He also submitted that the medical evidence does not corroborate the fardbeyan version about the injuries.