SHANKAR MAHTO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 2.04.2003 passed in Sessions Case No. 466 of 1994, Tr. No. 94 of 2001 by Shri Parash Nath Sinha, learned Additional Court (Fast Track) Manger, by which the two appellants were found guilty u/s. 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for having committed the offence of culpable homicide not amounting to murder of Bhuneshwar Mahto (deceased) and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years each and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000.00 each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The appellants were, however, not found guilty u/s. 147 read with Ss. 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code. They were also not found guilty u/s. 27 of the Arms Act".

(2.) THE prosecution case, in short, is that the elder brother of the deceased informed P.W.7, Uchit Mahto that the deceased was coming with him after obtaining bail from Laheriasarai. On 12.3.1993 at about 6 P.M. the deceased alighted from the bus and was proceeding to his house. When he reached near the house of accused Nageshwar Mahto all on a sudden all the accused persons including the present appellants variously armed surrounded the deceased and on the order of the accused Nageshwar Mahto the appellants assaulted the deceased with the butt of the gun and brick bats on his head causing injuries as a result of which he fell unconscious. On Hullah several villagers arrived and they also indulged in the assault by means of lathi etc. The police after investigation submitted the charge sheet. The appellants alongwith others were tried by the learned Court below in which they were convicted in the manner indicated about.

(3.) IN this appeal it has been contended that the prosecution case is entirely false and the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution is not trust worthy. The prosecution case suffers from material contradictions. The deceased had sustained injuries while alighting from the bus. Since the parties were on inimical terms from before they took advantage of this incident and filed this false case against the appellants and others. Accordingly, they have prayed that this appeal be allowed and they be acquitted of the charges framed against them.