MANOJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR WITH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE two Criminal Appeals were earlier heard by a Division Bench. The Judgment dated 28.06.2005 discloses that there arose a difference of opinion between the two Hon ble Judges, while one allowed the appeals and acquitted all the appellants mainly on account of non - mentioning of names of the accused persons in Station Diary Entry No. 478 dated 29.3.1995, the other placed reliance upon the evidence of witnesses including the informant (P.W. 6), took notice of protest petition (Exhibit -2) filed by the informant alleging that the police was in collusion with the accused persons and deposition of P.W. 10 that when he reached the police station to lodge the First Information Report, he found the father of accused Manoj Singh present there who was talking with the Officer -Incharge and on the basis of these materials he did not give importance to the aforesaid Sanha.

(2.) He found the accused/appellants guilty of the charges and accordingly dismissed both the appeals. Due to such difference of opinion the appeals were again listed for hearing and have been heard by me. This judgment shall govern both these appeals. Both these appeals arise out of same judgment dated 30th January, 1997 and order dated 1.2.1997 whereby appellant no. 5 of Criminal Appeal No. 70 of 1997 Hare Ram Singh has been convicted under Ss. 302 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the I.P.C.) and awarded life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000.00 for the offence u/s. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for three years for the offence u/s. 148 of the Indian Penal Code. The two appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 1997 and the remaining four appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 70 of 1997 have been convicted for the offence u/s. 302 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and awarded imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5,000.00 each. They have been convicted also for the offence u/s. 147 of the Indian Penal Code for which they have been awarded R.I. for two years. Further, all the appellants including Hare Ram Singh have been convicted for the offence u/s. 341 of the Indian Penal Code and awarded R.I. for one year. Their sentences are to run concurrently and in the case of failure to pay the fine the appellants are to suffer further imprisonment for one month. The amount of fine, if realised is to be paid to the widow of the deceased, Meera Devi (P.W. 2).

(3.) THE Fardbeyan (Ext. 7) of P.W. 6, Tanik Singh was recorded by S.I., R.K. Kama (P.W. 9), Officer - in -Charge, Halsi Police Station on 29.3.1995 at 20.00 hours at village Chourhi near Kharohi river, the place of occurrence, giving rise to Halsi P.S. Case No. 0029 dated 29.3.1995. The formal F.I.R. (Ext. 6) was prepared at the police station on the same date at 23.45 hours. The prosecution case in brief is that on 29.3.1995 at about 14.30 hours the informant was cutting wheat crop in his field situated east of river Kharohi. In a field situated by the side his cousin nephew Upendra Singh (deceased) was guarding the wheat crops in his field which had been cut and kept in bundles. At that time he saw the seven appellants and one Subendra Singh, brother of appellant Nand Lal Singh, coming from a well near the river. They came and surrounded Upendra Singh and caught him. They dragged him towards the river. Hare Ram Singh was armed with a Bhujali. On the 'hulla ' of Upendra Singh informant ran and came near the river. He saw all the persons while they dragged Upendra Singh and took him to the western side of the river and threw him down. Ram Pravesh Singh caught hold of head of Upendra Singh and his hands and legs were caught by other persons. Appellant Hare Ram Singh jumped on the chest of Upendra Singh and cut his neck with Bhujali. On seeing this the informant ran away. Appellant Nand Lal Singh ordered to catch him and kill him also. All the accused ran to catch him but the informant shouted and managed to run and reach near Dani Singh (P.W. 1). Ram Autar Singh (P.W. 3), Uday Shankar Singh (P.W. 7) and others who were working in the fields. He narrated the occurrence to them and then they all ran but the accused persons managed to flee away. On going closer he saw the neck of Upendra Singh cut in half from the front and he was dead. Thereafter the information of the occurrence was sent in the village and also to the police station. The reason for the occurrence was alleged to be land dispute between the deceased Upendra Singh as well as the informant and the accused persons on account of which several litigations were pending.