RAJESH PRASAD RAI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present criminal appeal has been preferred under Sec. 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against judgment of acquittal dtd. 7/4/2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI, Vaishali at Hajipur, in Sessions Trial No.406 of 2006 +392 of 2012, arising out of Patepur P.S. Case No.33 of 2004, whereby Respondent Nos.2 to 13 have been acquitted by the learned Trial Court from the charge of Ss. 307/149, 447/149, 147, 379/149 & 504/149 of Indian Penal Code and Respondent No.3 has been acquitted from the charge of Sec. 27 of the Arms Act.

(2.) Vide order dtd. 11/10/2023, notices were issued to the Respondent Nos.2 to 13, upon which they appeared by filing Vakalatnama through learned Advocate, Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh.

(3.) The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 1/4/2004, in the morning hours, the informant Rajesh Prasad Rai was harvesting wheat crops in his own field and was waiting for a tractor to transport the harvested bundles. In the meantime, all the accused persons, accompanied by 30-35 unknown individuals and armed with rifles, pistols, lathis, bhalas, and farsas, arrived at the scene. They allegedly began using abusive language and started picking up the bundles of harvested wheat. When the informant protested, accused Nagdeo Rai (Respondent No. 2) is said to have instigated the others to kill him. Acting upon this, Respondent No. 4 allegedly opened fire at the informant with the intention to kill, and the bullet is said to have struck the informant on his temporal region. The informant, in an attempt to save his life, ran towards the nearby field of his cousin, Surendra Prasad Rai, and narrated the incident to him. It is further alleged that while the informant was recounting the occurrence, the accused persons again arrived at the spot and resorted to indiscriminate firing with the intent to kill him. Somehow, the informant managed to escape and reached his home safely. It is also alleged that the accused persons took away the harvested wheat bundles, causing a loss of approximately Rs.15,000.00 to the informant.