VIJENDRA RAI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT no. 1 Vijendra Rai, appellant no. 2 Yogendra Rai, appellant no. 3, Ram Nath Rai and appellant no. 4 Raj Nath Rai have been convicted u/s. 324 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year each. Further they have been convicted u/s. 27 of the Arms Act and were sentenced to undergo R.I. for 2 years each. Appellant no. 5 Ballam @ Ballam Rai has been convicted u/s. 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in short, is that on 19.11.1987 at 7.30 A.M. the informant Kapildeo Rai was sitting on a chowki at his DARWAZA. His son Sheo Kumar Rai andhis brother Ram Ekbal Rai were also present there. It has been alleged that the accused persons (neighbours) Vijendra Rai, Yogendra Rai, Ram Nath Rai and Raj Nath Rai suddenly came there having armed with countrymade gun and pistols. The accused Ballam Rai ordered the accused persons to assault the informant. Thereafter all the aforesaid accused persons fired at the informant Kapildeo Rai from their gun and pistols. The informant sustained injuries on his head and below the right side of eye, neck, chest, abdomen and back. After sustaining injuries he fell down. Thereafter the son of the informant Sheo Kumar Rai and his brother Ram Ekbal Rai started raising alarm. On hearing the alarm several persons of the village came there. Thereafter the accused persons fled away in the western direction. The motive of the alleged occurrence is said to be that there had been land dispute between the informant and the accused persons and the same was going on between them. Thereafter his statement was recorded by the S.I., Dulhin Bazar Police Station and on the basis of his fard beyan a formal F.I.R. was registered. The police started investigation and after completion of investigation charge -sheet was submitted against the accused persons. Accordingly, cognizance was taken and case was committed to the Court of Sessions.

(3.) THE prosecution, in support of its case, examined altogether 5 witnesses.