ANANDI YADAV Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal was called out and none appeared to prosecute it. We have heard Sushri Shashi Bala Verma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and we have ourselves perused the record. We may refer to the provision of Section 386 Cr.P.C. which creates a right of hearing in favour either of the appellant or his counsel only when he appears. No counsel having appeared before us, we have proceeded to pass the present judgment after having studied the material evidence ourselves.

(2.) THE informant, Sanjay Yadav (P.W. 2), was not an eye witness to the occurrence. He stated that his mother had gone to sell cow dung cakes in Kadirganj market and was to come from there after purchasing biscuits for his younger brother Babloo Yadav (P.W.3) who was lying ill in the house. He stated that when she had reached south of the village at about 7.30 P.M., this appellant had strangulated her to death in a Arahar field by dragging her into that field. The deceased Sitabiya Devi raised cries and persons who were passing -by also raised Hulla upon which, this appellant is said to have tightened up to the noose around the neck of the deceased to kill her. It was stated by the informant that the present appellant was of bad antecedent and could not have hesitated in abusing any one.

(3.) AS appears from the evidence of the investigating officer, P.W.10 Pramod Kant, he inspected the place of occurrence which was the Arahar field and found the Arahar plants broken and trampled. There was a path way running on the southern ridge of that field and it further appeared that the deceased had been dragged into the field as the dragging mark was seen there. The investigating officer P.W.10 recorded the statements of witnesses and after completing the investigation sent the present appellant up for trial.