BISWANATH GOPE Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Though as many as eight number of accused-persons were put on trial, rest having been acquitted of the charges, Bishwanath Gope alone (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) suffered conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 27 of the Arms Act, in which, .while he was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life on the first count, no sentence was awarded on the second count.

(2.) Factual matrix appearing from the fardbayan of Ajab Lal Yadav and also narrations made by the witnesses at trial can be recapitulated with brief narration of them. At about 11 a.m. on 23rd July, 1984, while Rajendra Gope (hereinafter referred to as the deceased), was working along with his nephew Ajab Lal Gope in the field, which situated in Jagwa Khanda of village Kharaura for transplanation of paddy crops, the appellant came along with other accused-persons (since acquitted) and on exhortation made by Ram Prit Gope for executing killing of the deceased, appellant fired shots on him when he dropped injured. All those who were working in the adjacent field came there and took the injured to State Hospital, Harnaut. However, before any medial aid could be provided to the injured, he succumbed to the injuries. As for genesis of the incident, it was alleged in the earliest version of the prosecution that Yugal Gope, cousin brother of the deceased, was at logger's head with Bishwanath Gope, appellant, and preceding the incident, Yugal Gope had assaulted Bhajji Gope, brother of the appellant with fists and slaps, pursuant to which appellant got reacted and executed killing of Rajendra Gope, who happened to be agnate of said Yugal Gope.

(3.) After Police was set in motion, investigation commenced and in the process of collection of evidence, Police Officer visited place of occurrence, prepared inquest report over the dead-body of the deceased, got autopsy held by the doctor and on conclusion of investigation, laid charge-sheet before the Court. In the eventual trial that followed, the State examined altogether seven witnesses, including, doctor, Police Officer, family members of the deceased, who claimed to have been working in the field during material time of incident, and other witnesses who too claimed to be ocular to the incident.