PRAMOD SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present batch of three appeals arise out of judgment of conviction dated 24.07.2007 and order of sentence dated 25.05.2007 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of Fast Track Court No.2, Khagaria in two Sessions Trials No. 174/2001 and 114/2002. By the above judgment of conviction, the seven appellants of the three appeals were held guilty of committing offence Under Section 302/34 of the IPC and after being heard on sentence on 25.05.2007, each of them was directed to serve rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay fine of Rs. 20,000/ - else to serve simple imprisonment for six months. The learned trial court directed that in case of realization of fine, the same was to be paid to the informant and other kith and kin of the deceased as compensation. The three appeals have been heard by us together and they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Before we set out the facts of the case, it appears pertinent to note that initially appellants, Kamdeo Singh, Aasin Singh, Promod Singh, Kapileshwar Singh, Krishnadeo Singh and Manoj Singh were charged together by order dated 16.01.2002 passed in Sessions Trial No. 174/2001 . The solitary appellant, Subodh Singh in Criminal Appeal 816/2007 had not been put on trial on the ground of evading his appearance and it appears that after his appearance was procured, he was charged for committing an offence under Section 302/34 IPC by an order passed on 03.02.2003 in Sessions Trial No. 114/2002 which was registered on commitment of the case of the appellant, Subodh Singh. The two sessions trials proceeded independently and the same set of four witnesses namely, Radhey Singh, Arun Singh, Siyaram Singh and Vijendra Singh who had been examined as PWs 1 to 4 in Sessions Trial No. 114/2002, had also been examined in connected Sessions Trial No. 174/2001. The two trials proceeded separately up to the examination of PW -4 when on 21.03.2005, the trials were clubbed together and PWs -5 and 6 were examined after clubbing of the cases. It may be pertinent to point out that Investigating Officer of the case was not examined.

(3.) Coming to the facts of the case, the prosecution is based on the Fard -e -beyan of Radhey Singh who was examined as PW -1 in Sessions Trial No.114/2002 and PW -4 as Sessions Trial No. 174/2001. It was stated by him that he was searching for Suro Sah and he was going towards a field (probably a playground) which was situated in his village. At about 5:00 P.M., he found near the house of Ranvijay Singh (not examined) that all the appellants except appellant Subodh Singh were carrying arms and were assaulting the deceased, Madhav Pd. Singh. It was stated that appellant, Promod Singh, Kapileshwar Singh and Krishnadeo Singh put the deceased down on the ground and mounted on his chest and thereafter appellant Promod Singh fired a shot into the temple of the deceased. Appellant Kapileshwar Singh pumped a bullet into the chest of the deceased while appellants Krishnadeo Singh and Pramod Singh fired one shot each which hit on the two arms of the deceased. As a result of the shooting made by the appellants upon the deceased, he died on the spot.