KASIM @ KASIM ANSARI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Uday Kumar, learned counsel for the two appellants and Sri Ajay Mishra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

(2.) The present Appeal was preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 18.3.1993 passed in Sessions Trial No. 118 of 1992 / 145 of 1992 and 183 of 1992/85 of 1992 by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi (arising out of Riga P.S. Case No. 32 of 1992 ) . By the said judgment the appellant/Kasim @ Kasim Ansari was held guilty for offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and so far appellant no. 2 is concerned , he was held guilty for offence under Section 302 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the appellants were sentenced for rigorous imprisonment for life.

(3.) Short fact of the case is that on the basis of fardbyan of Shahid Ansari, son of Rafique Ansari an F.I.R. vide Riga P.S. Case No. 32 of 1992 was registered on 7.3.1992 for offence under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It was alleged by the informant that while he along with father namely, Rafique Ansari and other co-villagers had visited a Maszid of the village, ten accused persons namely: 1-Kasim, son of Hadis Ansari, 2-Qayum son of Sadique Ansari, 3-Taslim Miyan , son of Sadik Ansari/appellant no. 2, 4-Farjand, son of Munsi Miyan, 5-Hakim Ansari, son of Iman Ansari, 6-Idrish , son of Shaheb Jan, 7-Julfikar, son of Taslim, 8-Hadis, son of Dhanu Miyan, 9-Khalil Ansari, son of Adalat Ansari and 10-Muzaffar Ali, son of Abdul Bari started assaulting his father, in which he fell down. Thereafter, two accused persons Taslim Ansari/appellant no. 2 and Qayum caught both hands of his father and thereafter, Md. Kasim gave knife blow on his chest. The reason for such occurrence was disclosed regarding offering prayer in the Maszid premises. Subsequently, the injured was carried on thela to hospital, but on way to hospital he succumbed. Thereafter, dead body was brought near the door of the deceased. Subsequently, on information received Police arrived, recorded fardbayan of Shahid Ansari, who had been examined as PW 11. In the present case the dead body was forwarded for post-mortem examination, which was held and in post-mortem examination one external injury was found, that was incised injury on the chest of the deceased. The case was investigated and thereafter, charge sheet was submitted on 9.5.1992 against all the ten F.I.R. named accused persons. After completion of supply of police paper the case was committed to the court of Sessions on 1.7.1992. However, charges were framed against eight accused persons including both the appellants. During the trial prosecution produced eleven witnesses to prove the case. Alisher Ansari, brother of the informant, was examined as PW 1; Dr. Virendra Kumar Sharma, who had conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased was examined as PW 2; Md. Jahoor Ansari, son of the deceased and brother of the informant was examined as PW 3; Shamsher Ansari, son of the deceased and brother of the informant was tendered as PW 4; whereas Sri Arun Kumar, who was the Investigating Officer of the case was examined as PW 5. In the case remaining six witnesses namely Hafiz Ansari PW 6, Farookh Ansari PW 7, Shaheb Jan Mian PW 8, Shafi Mohammad/PW 9, Abdul Sattar/PW 10 and informant/Shahid Ansari, who was examined as PW 11 were declared hostile. PW 1 and PW 3 had claimed to be eye witnesses. In the examination-in-chief, PW 1 as well as PW 3 claimed to be eye witnesses and stated that while they along with their father and other villagers were entering into the premises of Maszid for offering Namaz, the accused persons were coming out and thereafter occurrence had taken place whereas, in the fardbyan of Shahid Ansari (PW 11), who has also claimed as eye witness, it was stated that dispute arose in between the parties in respect of offering prayer (Namaz). It was disclosed as per fardbayan that the prosecution side were offering prayer and thereafter dispute arose.