RAI MATHURA PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These five appeals have been heard together, as they arise out of the same judgment. Rai Mathura Prasad is the sole appellant in Cr. App. 520/81. He died during the pendency of this appeal and as such this appeal stands abated. There is one appellant each in the other three criminal appeals. These three appellants have been convicted under Sec. 302read with Sec. 34of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. They have also been convicted under Sec. 120 -B of the Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. One of the accused persons of the case, namely, Surendra Singh, has been acquitted by the trial court. The Government Appeal has been filed for enhancement of the sentence against the appellants and has been admitted only against Jitu Gope and Jai Lal Mahton, who are appellants in Cr. App. Nos. 582/81 and 581/81 respectively, and has been dismissed as against others. One Yogendra Singh, who was also a charge -sheeted accused in this case, could not be apprehended before 4.5.1981 and as such he was tried separately in Sessions Trial No. 648 of 1981 and was convicted under Sec. 302read with Sec. 34of the Indian Penal Code. He has preferred Cr. App. No. 246 of 1983 against his conviction and sentence and his appeal is being disposed of separately.

(2.) The prosecution case is that in the night between 21st and 22nd November, 1979, the deceased, namely, Sardar Kartar Singh, had slept on a Chauki lying on the Varendah of his Garage, known as Arora Garage, in Mohalla Haziganj within Patna City Chowk Police Station, after locking the gate of the compound wall, which was about 7' high. At about 5.30 A.M. his Darban namely, P.W. 8 Milan Kumar Rai, who was also sleeping nearby inside a truck, went near the deceased and found him lying dead in a pool of blood having cut injuries on his forehead and neck. Then, he in formed the driver of the deceased, namely, Arun Kumar Sinha (P.W. 9), who was living in the neighbourhood. This P.W. 9 also went near the deceased along with P.W. 8. Thereafter P.W. 8 informed P.W. 20 Pritam Singh, who was brother of the deceased, about the incident. On hearing the news, Pritam Singh went to that Garage along with his son Sukhjeet Singh (P.W. 13). After seeing the deceased, Pritam Singh went to Chowk Police Station, which was half a mile away from the Garage, and submitted a written report there at 6.45 A.M. on 22.11.1979. The Officer -in -Charge of the Police Station, namely, Batuk Nath Tripathi (P.W. 23) registered a case and at once proceeded to the place of occurrence.

(3.) According to the prosecution case, the extension telephone, which was near the deceased, had started ringing when the informant Pritam Singh (P.W. 20) and his son Sukhjit Singh (P.W. 13) were near the deceased before the informant proceeded to the police station for lodging the first information report. The informant, however, could not receive the call as the cord of the telephone was cut off. Similarly, the cord of the receiver of another extension telephone was also found cut off. So, at the instance of the informant, Sukhjit Singh went to the main building for receiving the call as the main telephone was kept there. It has been stated by Sukhjit Singh that it was one of the appellants, namely, Rai Mathura Prasad (since dead), who was making enquiry on telephone as to whether Kartar Singh had been murdered and as to whether his neck was cut. This witness replied in the affirmative. He has further stated that on his enquiry Rai Mathura Prasad disclosed his name also on telephone. This is said to be one of the chains in the link of the conspiracy.