LAWS(PAT)-1987-2-1

BASUDEV YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On February 20, 1987
BASUDEV YADAV Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The aforementioned appellants have been convicted of the charge under S. 396 of the Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') and they have been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life.

(2.) The case against them arose on the statement of P. W. 5 Charitar Singh of village Manjhauli, P. S. Mofassil in the district of Gaya. The case is that these four appellants along with 20-25 dacoits raided his house in the night at about 8.30 P.M. on 2-6-1983, ransacked the whole house, looted away the properties including valuables and while retreating, one of the dacoits exploded a bomb which caused fatal injury to Kishori Singh, brother of the informant and also to his son Ghuran and a nephew named Awadh Singh. The informant himself also got injury due to explosion of the bomb. It is further stated that even one of the dacoits also got injury due to explosion, who was subsequently traced out and was sent to hospital for treatment. Both the informant's brother Kishori Singh and also the dacoit died of the injuries sustained by them, due to explosion of the bomb.

(3.) In appeal before us, the learned Counsel Sri A. N. Sahai has confined his argument only with regard to the identification of these four appellants in the commission of the crime. It has been pointed out that all the four are related to each other. Accused-appellants Nos. 1 and 2 are full brothers and No. 4 Ram Prasad Yadav and appellant No. 1 Basudev Yadav and No. 3 Gaya Yadav are outsiders belonging to different village. This appellant No. 3 was earlier arrested in some other case, but on the petition filed by the State, was remanded in this case as well and, was put on T. I. parade on 4-10-1983. The T.I. parade was conducted by a Magistrate P. W. 6, Sri Munilal Paswan and it was P. W. 5 only, out of all other witnesses attending the parade, who is said to have identified the appellant Gaya Yadav. So there is only one identification against him.