PUSHPA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has envoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court challenging an order dtd. 29/2/2024, passed in Sessions Trial No. 241 of 2020, arising out of Goreakothi P.S. Case No. 26 of 2019, upon an application filed on behalf of the accused persons under Ss. 227 and 228 of the Cr.P.C. praying for discharge them from the charge-sheeted offence punishable under Sec. 307 of the I.P.C.

(2.) The learned Additional Sessions Judge-IX, Siwan discharged the accused persons from the offence under Sec. 307 of the I.P.C. on the ground that Sec. 307 of the I.P.C. stipulates that the accused must indicate that there was specific intention with knowledge that same would likely to result in death of the other party. As per the F.I.R., it is apparent that the dispute arose over some trivial issues and whatever happened was at the best on the spur of the moment, without their being pre-determination on the part of the petitioner, much less to cause death on the side of the informant. Thus, the learned Additional sessions Judge-IX, Siwan found that there was no ingredient of offence under Sec. 307 of the I.P.C. Therefore, he transmitted the case to the court of the learned A.C.J.M.-X, Siwan for framing charge under Ss. 341/448/323/504/506/34 of the I.P.C. and Sec. 27 of the Arms act for trial and disposal.

(3.) It is the case of the prosecution that over a dispute relating to landed property, the accused persons trespassed into the house of the informant on 6/2/2019, threatened him to withdraw a case pending against them and assaulted some family members of the informant. Subsequently, under the instruction of one Shatrudhan Dubey, his son namely Ankit Dubey opened fire. The F.I.R. does not disclose that the informant received gun shot injury on her left cheek, causing fracture of mandible.