CHANDRA DEO YADAV, NATHUN YADAV, SUKHARI YADAV AND DEO NARAIN YADAV @ DEEP NARAIN YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The seven appellants in the two appeals are aggrieved by a common judgment dated 17.2.1988, passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Patna, in Sessions Trial No. 111 of 1985 The State of Bihar v. Ram Dayal Yadav and Ors. whereby they have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code in prosecution of common object of murder of Mewa Lal Yadav. The learned trial court has further held accused Nathun Yadav, Jita Yadav, and Lalan Yadav guilty under Section 148 IPC, and the remaining accused persons guilty under Section 147, IPC. He has further found and held accused Ram Dayal Yadav and Sukhari Yadav guilty under Section 323, IPC and accused Lalan Yadav guilty under Section 324, IPC and convicted accordingly. All the accused persons have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC. Nathun Yadav, Jita Yadav, and Lalan Yadav have further been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 148 IPC. Sukhari Yadav, Chandradeo Yadav, Deb Narayan Yadav alias Deep Narayan Yadav, and Ram Dayal Yadav have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each for the offence under Section 147, IPC. Lalan Yadav has also been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under Section 324, IPC. Sukhari Yadav and Ram Dayal Yadav have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each for the offence punishable under Section 323, IPC. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) It may incidentally be mentioned that one Preman Yadav, a minor, was also sent up for trial, but was not tried along with the present appellants. The impugned judgment makes no reference of Preman Yadav and, therefore, his case does not arise for our consideration.

(3.) The prosecution case, as disclosed in the Fardbeyan (Ext.3), is that informant Suresh Yadav was Chaukidar No. 5/2 of Bikram P.S. In the night between 29.4.1984 and 30.4.1984, he had gone to Kanpa Pul to do his duty. On 30.4.1984, early in the morning at 6 A.M., after he had returned from Kanpa Pul, he saw to the south of his house accused Ram Dayal Yadav, Chandradeo Yadav, Sukhari Yadav, Preman Yadav, and Deo Naram Yadav, all armed with lathis, accused Lalan Yadav armed with garasa, and accused Nathuni Yadav and Jita Yadav armed with bhalas, were throwing brick-bats towards the dalan in front of his (informant's) house, and were hurling abuses. It is said that Mohan Yadav protested, whereupon accused Deo Naram Yadav ordered for assault. Accused Ram Dayal Yadav threw a brick-bat on Mohan Yadav, the other accused also moved forward to assault Mohan Yadav, and accused Jita Yadav and Nathun Yadav with bhala, and Sukhari Yadav with lathi, assaulted Mohan Yadav. It is further said that Mewa Lala Yadav, the brother of the informant in the meantime came from the side of his house to save his father, when accused Jita Yadav gave a bhala blow on his chest, and accused Lalan Yadav with garasa and accused Ram Dayal Yadav with lathi assaulted Mewa Lal Yadav, on the instigation of accused Deo Narayan Yadav. After receiving the injuries, Mewa Lal Yadav fell down on the ground. The informant, Ram Pravesh yadav (brother of the informant) and Naresh Yadav (cousin of the informant) rushed to save the above injured, when accused Lalan Yadav gave a garasa blow on the head of the informant, and accused Sukhari Yadav gave a lathi blow on the leg of the informant; accused Lalan Yadav with garasa, accused Chandradeo Yadav with lathi, and accused Preman Yadav with brick-bat, assaulted Naresh Yadav, and accused Preman Yadav assaulted Ram Pravesh Yadav with lathi. It is further alleged that, on hulla the villagers started arriving, and the accused persons ran away. The informant then found that his brother Mewa Lal Yadav had succumbed to the injuries received by him. The reason behind the occurrence as mentioned in the fardbeyan is that there was an old land dispute between the parties.