RANJEET KUMAR JHA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeals have been filed by the appellants-convicts under Sec. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') assailing the judgment of conviction dtd. 28/5/2013 and order of sentence dtd. 4/6/2013, passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in Sessions Trial Nos.288 of 2009, 252 of 2010, 862 of 2008 and 548 of 2010, arising out of Kazi Mohammadpur P.S. Case No.214 of 2006, whereby appellants Mintu Singh @ Dhruvnath Parasar and Ranjeet Jha have been found guilty under Ss. 302, 307, 120(B) and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') as well as Sec. 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under Ss. 302 and 120(B) of the IPC and fine of Rs.1,00,000.00 and in default of payment of fine, they have to undergo RI for five years. Appellants Mintu Singh @ Dhruvnath Parasar and Ranjeet Jha have also been found guilty under Sec. 307 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs.10,000.00 and in default of payment fine, they have to undergo RI for two years. Appellants Mintu Singh @ Dhruvnath Parasar and Ranjeet Jha have further been found guilty under Sec. 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three years. So far as appellants, namely, Sidhnath Parasar, Vinay Kumar Sharma and Gauri Shankar Singh are concerned, they have been found guilty for the offences punishable under Ss. 302 and 120(B) IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.10,000.00 and in default of payment of fine, they have to undergo RI for one year. All the sentences are directed to run separately.

(2.) The factual matrix of the present case is as under:

(3.) After registration of the FIR, the investigating agency started investigation and during the course of investigation, recorded the statement of the witnesses, inquest Panchnama were prepared and dead bodies of three deceased were sent for post mortem. After the investigation was over, the investigating agency filed charge-sheet against the concerned accused persons. However, as some of the accused were not available, the charge-sheet came to be filed against some of the accused after they came to be arrested. As the offences were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the concerned Magistrate Court committed the case to the Court of Sessions and before the Sessions Court, four different Sessions Trial Numbers were registered, i.e., Sessions Trial Nos.288 of 2009, 252 of 2010, 862 of 2008 and 548 of 2010.