KUER SAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the Judgment and order dated 5th December, 1992 passed by Sri R.A. Singh, the then 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Siwan in Sessions Trial No. 34 of 1988 has preferred this appeal. By the impugned order the sole appellant has been convicted for commission of offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years.

(2.) The prosecution case can be culled out from the fard beyan given by one Naimulla at 6 A.M. on 8.4.1987 at the Sadar Hospital, Siwan which was in respect of an occurrence which took place in the preceeding night. According to the informant his father Md. Sammi as Surpunch of Gram Panchayat, Bhelpur had imposed a fine of Rs. 2000/- upon the appellant herein prior to the instant occurrence as the appellant was found to have committed rape on the daughter of one Chandrama Sah and as such he bore a grudge against the Surpunch. It is said that in the midnight of 7/8th April, 1987 while Md. Sammi was sleeping in his chabutra, accused Kuer Sah arrived and requested the Surpunch to exonerate him from the penalty imposed upon him and when Md. Sammi refused to comply, Kuer Sah with intention to kill inflicted two Dab blows on the face and neck region of Md. Sammi who raised cries of alarm which attracted Naimullah, the informant, who arrived at the scene and accused Kuer Sah took to his heels. Seeing the gravity of his injuries Md. Sammi was removed to the Sadar Hospital, Siwan for treatment and there as stated above the fard beyan was recorded which culminated in the registration of Barharia (G.B.Nagar) P.S. Case No. 36/87 under Sections 307 and 324 of the I.P.C.

(3.) The police after due investigation submitted a chargesheet under Sections 307 and 324 of I.P.C. and upon commitment of the case to the court of Sessions charges under Sections 324/34, 307/34 were framed against the accused who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The plea of the defence was one of innocence and false implication since the accused was not ready to work for Md. Sammi without remuneration. The defence has examined 5 witnesses.