RANJEET CHOUDHARY, SON OF SRI RAM KISHORE CHOUDHARY, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHHOHAR DOLANGI TOLA, P.S. Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals, each filed by one appellant, are directed against the judgment of conviction dated 19.12.2012 and the order of sentence dated 24.12.2012, passed by learned Addl. District and Sessions Judge-II, Katihar in S.T. No. 204 of 2010. Altogether 9 accuseds, including both the appellants, were put on trial. Vide the judgment, the learned Trial Court acquitted seven (07) of them and convicted the appellant Ranjeet Choudhary (in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 117 of 2013) under Sec. 302 Penal Code as well as Sec. 27 of the Arms Act whereas appellant Ram Kishore Chaudhary (in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 19 of 2013) was convicted for the offence under Sec. 302/34 IPC. Both the convicts under the relevant charge were sentenced to undergo R.I. for life. Under Sec. 27 of the Arms Act, the appellant Ranjeet Choudhary was also held guilty and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 03 years with further direction that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) Put briefly, the prosecution case as stated in the fardbeyan (Ext.-3) and developed at the trial is that on 17.07.2008, the informant (P.W.-9) along with other family members were close to their house constructing palani (thatched hut) on the bandh. At about 3 p.m. in the afternoon, two appellants along with other accused persons variously armed with rifle, country made pistol etc. came. They started protesting and abusing the deceased and the informant which was retaliated where after appellant Ranjeet Choudhary, who was armed with a country made rifle, at the orders of appellant Ram Kishore Chaudhary, opened fire which hit the chest of the deceased. They continued with indiscriminate firings. Firing was made on him as well as his mother (P.W.-8) which hit his mother below the eye. The motive for having committed the occurrence was narrated as old land dispute between them. Recently, there was a decree in the title suit between the parties in favour of the deceased. Seeing the occurrence, the informant fled away from the place of occurrence and came back with the Police where after the fardbeyan was recorded by Uday Kumar, S.H.O., Falka, Pothiya O.P. (P.W.-10) on 17.07.2008 at 4.45 p.m. at the place of occurrence which gave rise to Falka Pothiya P.S. Case No. 26 of 2008. The formal F.I.R. is Ext.-4. The I.O. (P.W.-10) took up the investigation and prepared the inquest report of the dead body (Ext.5) and dispatched the same for autopsy. After concluding the investigation, the challan was led against the appellants and other accuseds whereon cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions on 14.05.2010. On transfer, the case came on the file of the learned Trial Court where charges were framed under relevant sections on 108.2010 which were read over and explained to the appellants/accuseds to which they pleaded not guilty.

(3.) In order to prove the charges, the prosecution examined 10 witnesses. P.W.-1 Dr. Ram Rekha Suman is the doctor who held autopsy on the cadaver and submitted the post mortem report (Ext.-1). P.W.-2 Beena Devi, an agnate of the informant, P.W.-3 Satish Kumar Yadav, P.W.-4 Nago Chaudhary (another agnate), P.W.-6 (Satyanarain Yadav), P.W.-7 Police Yadav (father of the deceased), P.W.-8 Suro Devi @ Uro Devi (mother of the informant) and P.W.-9 (informant) have proclaimed themselves as eye witnesses to the occurrence. P.W.-5 Jitendra Kumar Chaurasia is a hearsay witness whereas P.W.-10 Udai Kumar is the Investigating Officer who conducted investigation and finding the accusations true, led the charge-sheet. After conclusion of the evidence, the statement of the accused under Sec. 313(1) of the Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein they abjured the guilt. Besides the oral evidence, the prosecution also brought on record the post mortem report (Ext.-1), the fardbeyan of P.W.-9 (Ext.-3), the formal F.I.R. drawn in the case (Ext.-4), the inquest report prepared on 17.07.2008 (Ext.-5) and two charge-sheets filed in this case as Ext.-6 and 6/1, the judgment and decree passed in T.S. No. 43 of 1998 as Exts.-7 and 8 respectively besides some other documents. The Trial Court, on close scrutiny and evaluation of the evidence produced at the trial, found the charges having been proved beyond shadow of reasonable doubt against the present appellants and held them guilty as stated above. However, the learned Trial Court found the evidence wholly deficient against the 07 other accuseds put on trial along with the appellants and they were acquitted of the charges.