RAM CHANDRA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is chequered history of this appeal. Five accused appellants faced trial in Sessions Trial No. 296 of 1989 before the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Dhaabad, and they were convicted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code by the impugned judgment and order, dated 31-8-1989 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. The accused appellants No. 1, 2, 3 and 5 were also convicted under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months each. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The appeal being filed on 27-9-1989. The accused appellants No. 1 and 2, namely. Ram Chandra Sharma and Chhabi Rani Devi were granted interim bail by order, dated 28-9-1989 but the prayer for bail of other accused appellants was rejected. On later dates also, such prayers were rejected.

(3.) The case was heard by a Division Bench continuously for two days on 13-5-1992 and 14-5-1992 and then order was passed on 15-5-1992 for recording of some of the depositions of some more witnesses under Section 391 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') and reasons were given in that order as to why such additional evidence was necessary when it was found that the evidence adduced in the trial court were not sufficient enough to unfold the prosecution case or to get truth about the occurrence. After that, evidence of nine more witnesses have been examined in this court on 5-1-1992 and 6-11-1992 and also further statement of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 of the Code. After that the appeal was again heard by a Division Bench, but the Hon ble Judges hearing the appeal in a Division Bench differed in their opinion and separate judgments were written by Brother R. N. Sahay, J. and also by Brother Amir Das, J. By the judgment of Brother Sahay, J., the appeal was allowed and the conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial court were set aside, but Brother Das, J. found that the case was proved against the accused appellants under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and maintained the conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Judge, but nothing was stated regarding the conviction and sentence under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in the concluding portion of the order. After the Brother Judges differed in their opinion, the matter was referred to Hon ble the Chief Justice and then as per the Patna High Court Rules, it was referred to this Bench as a third Judge.