SHEO BALAK SAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO accused persons, i.e., the present appellant Sheo Balk Sah and the acquitted accused Jagarnath Sah, were put on trial in Sessions Trial No. 113/87 / 168/2001 after being indicted of committing offence under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and by judgment dated 17.7.2002, which was delivered by learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court -I, Siwan, while the other accused Jagarnath Sah was acquitted of the charge, the present appellant was held guilty of committing the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and, after being heard on sentence, was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four years as also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ -; else to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. The appellant challenges the impugned judgment holding him guilty of committing the offence and directing him to bear the penalty as inflicted upon him.

(2.) PW 3 Panmati Devi had gone out of her house on 29.06.1986 at around 6:00 AM to attend to the call of nature. When she had reached the cotton -plant -field of one Nagina Lal, the present appellant Sheo Balak Sah along with the acquitted accused Jagarnath Sah came there and, while Jagarnath Sah caught PW 3, this appellant is said to have given multiple blows with Chhura on the right side of her abdomen, which pierced very deeply into her belly. The other accused Jagarnath Sah also allegedly assaulted the lady with legs and fists and this appellant Sheo Balak Sah, uttering that the lady was a Dian (witch) who had applied evils to his buffalo be killed, dealt blows on her back, chest and at two places on the left side of her leg. The informant caught the knife and, as such, she got injured in her right hand.

(3.) THE Investigating Officer has not been examined. As such, it does not appear as to how the police could get the information about the occurrence and could reach the Sadar Hospital, Siwan, but the Court believes that the lady was admitted into that hospital and under the ordinary rules and practice, the doctor attending on her ought to have issued a requisition calling the police to the hospital to record the statement of the victim of the offence and, presumably, the police had recorded Ext. 2, the Fardbeyan of the lady there. It appears from the FIR (Ext. 1) that on the basis of Ext. 2, the Fardbeyan, the case was registered and the investigation was proceeded with. It further appears from the records that a requisition was given by the Investigating Officer of the case, i.e., Sub Inspector of Police of Muffasil Police Station, Siwan after noting down the injuries on the person of PW 3 to the Doctor for issuing the injury certificate and, on that basis, the injury certificate (Ext. 3) was issued. The police requisition for the injury certificate was marked 'Ext. 4'. After close of the investigation, the two accused persons were sent up for trial which ended in the impugned judgment.