NARMADESHWAR DUBEY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL the three appeals have been heard together because they arise out of the same impugned judgment and order and are, therefore, being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) FROM the impugned judgment dated 15th June, 2002, passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, F.T.C.III, West Champaran at Bettiah, in Sessions Trial No. 53 of 1999, it appears that six accused persons were put on trial but out of them one Paras Dubey died during pendency of the trial and remaining five accused persons have preferred these three criminal appeals against their conviction. Appellant Narmadeshwar Pandey has been convicted for the offence under Sections 302/109 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant Basanti Kunwar has been convicted for the offence under Sec.302 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. Both of them (appellants of Cr. Appeal 335/02) have been awarded R.I. for life and a fine of Rs. 5000.00 each and in default to undergo R.I. for further period of three years. The sole appellant of Cr. Appeal No. 336/02, Pargat Narayan Pandey, has been convicted for the offence under Sections 302/149 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under the Arms Act. For the offence under Sections 302/149 I.P.C. he has been awarded R.I. for life and a fine of Rs. 5000.00 and in default to undergo further R.I. for three years and for the remaining two offences he has been awarded R.I. for ten years and three years respectively. Both the appellants of Cr. Appeal No. 514/02, Pramod Dubey and Arbind Dubey, have been convicted for the offence under Sec. 302 I.P.C. for which they have been awarded R.I. for life and a fine of Rs. 5000.00 each and in default to undergo R.I. for further period of three years. They have also been awarded under the Arms Act to undergo R.I. for three years.

(3.) THE alleged offence was investigated by the police. It appears that during investigation the I.O. (P.W.14) prepared inquest report as well as seizure report in respect of two empties found near the dead body. He sent the dead body for post mortem examination, recorded statement of witnesses and submitted chargesheet against six persons including the five appellants but failed to apprehend two named accused Sukhal Mallah and Chhathu Yadav. After cognizance and commitment to the court of sessions, charges were framed against accused -appellants to which they pleaded not guilty leading to their trial and conviction as noticed earlier.