LAWS(PAT)-2013-12-8

MAHABIR SAHNI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On December 03, 2013
MAHABIR SAHNI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellants have been convicted under Section 364/34 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years each by judgment dated 30.11.1999 passed by the 2 nd Assistant Sessions Judge, Samastipur, in Sessions Trial No.284 of 1997.

(2.) THE case of the Informant is that in the night of 26.06.1996 at about 11.30 PM when he was sleeping in the cow shed with his son Ram Bilash Mahto, the Appellants came to the cow shed and asked Ram Bilash Mahto to accompany them. He was hesitant but the Appellants forced him on the gun point and took him away. The Informant was also threatened by the Appellants. Little while later he heard sound of firing. On the next day, he went to look for his son but only found some blood stained near Bandh from which he speculated that the Appellants after kidnapping his son had committed his murder. This Fard Beyan was given on the next day i.e. 27.06.1999 at 10.50 AM.

(3.) EVEN though during trial, PW 8 consistently stated that it was on gun point that the Appellants had kidnapped his son, but there are some notable points in his evidence. In paragraph 7, he stated that at the time of occurrence he did not suspect anything about the accused persons which indicates that, in fact, his son had voluntarily left with the Appellants. Moreover, from the evidence of PW 2, Kishore Mahto and PW 3, Pappu Kumar Mahto, who are the sons of the Informant, I find that they stated that on 26.06.1996 at about 11.30 PM while they were standing at the Betel Shop, they saw his brother accompanying the Appellants and after one and half hour they heard firing from the Bandh side. On appreciation of the evidence, it would appear that their brother was accompanying the Appellants voluntarily. Had it not been so, some protest, or report would have been made. Moreover, the next suspicious circumstance is, as to why the Informant did not report the matter immediately to the police even though he saw that his son was being kidnapped but reported it only on the next day at 10.50 AM after having first searched out his son.