SUJEET SHARMA Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

(2.) THE appellant has been convicted under Section 307/34 of the Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and a fine of rupees five thousand. He has, further, been convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine of rupees three thousand. However, for non -payment of fine the appellant has been ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. It has been ordered that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

(3.) DURING the trial eight witnesses have been examined who are P.W. 1 Dr. Mohan Kumar, the brother of the informant who has came to support the prosecution case that he saw Sujeet Sharma and Sanjay Sharma armed with pistol in hand fleeing away just after the occurrence and has brother got injury on his chest and disclosed that Sujeet Sharma has shot. He took the victim to Hospital and while taking his brother to Hospital, bomb exploded injuring his father. P.W. 2 is Satya Narain Modi @ Sattu Modi, the tea stall owner has turned hostile. P.W. 3 is Pago Yadav. He has also been declared hostile as not supported the prosecution case. P.W. 4 is Pramod Kumar. This witness has been tendered and stated that he does not know anything about the occurrence. P.W. 5 is the informant and he has supported the prosecution case alleged in the first information report. P.W. 6 is Shashi Bindu Choudhary. This witness has also been declared hostile as not supported the prosecution. P.W. 7 is Kirhns Kumar Gupta, the investigating officer. He stated that he recorded the statements of the witnesses, inspected the place of occurrence, tea stall, giving the description and all the boundary of the place of occurrence. However, this witness has been transferred during investigation on 17.07.2005 handing over the investigation to the Officer -in -Charge of Kotwali Police Station though he has proved the formal first information report, marked as Exhibit 2, fardbeyan as Exhibit 3 and has stated that there is no mention about the finding of blood. P.W. 8 is the Doctor who found the injury on the person of the informant and has found three injuries (i) circular 1/2" diameter inverted lacerated wound over front of chest with tattooing and bleeding, (ii) averted lacerated wound over back of right side 1/2" x 1/2" and (iii) presence of surgical emphysema. He examined the informant at 09.15 A.M. on 22.05.2005 and found that the injury is within three hours and grievous caused by fire arm and the patient referred to Patna Medical College Hospital and has proved his injury, marked as Exhibit 4. He also found injury on the person of Sitaram Kushwaha. However, the injury found on Sitaram Kushwaha (i) abrasion over the left knee joint area 1" x 1/2" x 2 1/2" x 1/4" and (ii) abrasion over left ankle joint area 1/2" x 1/4". However, he found injury simple caused by hard and blunt substance. Taking into consideration the oral and documental evidences and submissions made by the parties, the trial Court taking into consideration the fact that the informant supported the prosecution case and his evidence found to be consistent through out and his evidence is corroborated by the medical evidence as the evidence of informant, Indrabhushan Kushwaha, convicted the appellant and, further, taking into consideration the criminal history Exhibits 5 to 5/2 and 6 sentenced the appellant as mentioned above.