RABINDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CASE has been called out. None appears on behalf of appellant while the learned Additional Public Prosecutor is present. In the background of principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2013 (2) P.L.J.R. 276 (SC), whereunder the appellate Court has been held to be quite competent to dispose of the appeal even in absence of learned counsel for the appellant as well as without appointing Amicus Curiae, the record has been taken up with the assistance of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, who has been heard in detail as well as materials available on the record have minutely been gone through.

(2.) SOLE appellant Ravinder Singh has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 436 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years vide judgment of conviction and sentence dated 19.03.2002 passed by Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Gaya in Sessions Trial No.169 of 1993/ 52 of 2001.

(3.) PW -6, Suresh Sao gave his fard -bayan on 29.03.1992 at about 8.15 a.m. alleging inter alia that in the preceding night while he was sleeping at his Darwaza of his shop, awaken to urinate and during course thereof, had seen Ravinder Singh standing near his shop. His shop was under flame. He had also seen Shiv Janam Singh, Nagendra Singh, Kail Singh, Rajesh Singh standing at their house which lies behind his house. Seeing the fire, he raised alarm whereupon villagers assembled and Ravinder Singh, Shiv Janam Singh, Nagendra Singh, Kail Singh, Rajesh Singh gone inside their house. They tried their best to extinguish fire, but remained unsuccessful and on account thereof, the hut along with the articles having kept inside completely burnt and on account thereof, he sustained loss of Rs.10,000/ -. He had disclosed the event as well as had also disclosed names of Ravinder Singh and his family members to have lit fire to the villagers. It has further been disclosed that after extinguishing flame, all the accused persons came out from their house. Therefore, he apprehended that all the accused in connivance with each other had lit fire. The motive therefor has been disclosed as accused persons were insisting to remove his shop as it was in front of their house and for that, on 27.03.1992, panchayati was convened at the instance of accused Ravinder Singh, Kail Singh. It has further been disclosed that he had paid Rs.65,00/ - to Ravinder Singh at an earlier occasion for purchase of oxen which, Ravinder Singh flatly refused to return.