BHIKHARI CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) APPELLANT Bhikhari Chaudhary has been convicted under Sec.396 I.P.C. and has been awarded punishment of rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 2000/ - and in default he has to undergo a further period of rigorous imprisonment for one year. The appellant Kajrashan Noniya (Cri. Appeal No. 322/2002) has been convicted under Sec.396 I.P.C. for which he has been awarded the same sentence as awarded to Bhikhari Chaudhary. He has further been convicted under Sec. 412 I.P.C. for which he has been awarded rigorous imprisonment for five years.

(3.) AFTER the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, charges were framed to which both the appellants pleaded not guilty. From the trend of cross examination and submissions it appears that the appellants have not disputed the occurrence of dacoity and killing of Dharmnath Pandey, father of the informant, in the said occurrence on the date and time alleged by the prosecution. The defence of appellant Bhikhari Chaudhary is that he was on inimical term with one Rajbi Sai, who allegedly got him identified by the witnesses while in hajat custody. The defence of appellant Kajrashan Noniya is simply of false implication. Since they have not challenged the alleged occurrence at the place and time alleged and have advanced submissions only to challenge their identification in the T.I. Parade and also the identification of certain articles in a T.I. Parade, it is not deemed relevant to refer to the prosecution case in detail or to the deposition of various prosecution witnesses, many of whom have deposed and have been cross examined in respect of allegation made against another set of co -accused who were admittedly co -villagers of the informant and who were charged with conspiracy in respect of the alleged offence.