PARO SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants Paro Singh, Arbind Singh, Pappu Singh, and Nawal Singh have been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 323/34 of the IPC and each one has been sentenced to undergo S.I. for one year as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs.1000/- in default thereof, to undergo S.I. for one month, additionally, by the Additional Sessions Judge, IVth, Nawada vide his judgment of conviction and sentence dated 05.06.2015 in connection with Sessions Trial No.331 of 2005/158 of 2014.

(2.) Satendra Singh gave his fardbeyan on 10.09.2002 at about 04:00 PM outside hospital lying at his own village Kumbhi, P.S.-Warsaliganj, District-Nawada alleging inter alia that on the same day his co-villager Kesho Singh, son of Bhuali Singh came at his house and directed him to come along with him as, fertilizer is to be given to the field. On his denial, he began to demand the due amount which he was carrying on account of ploughing of his field by his tractor whereupon he said that after getting money in in pursuance with a Satta (agreement) in between his brother and others, he will clear the dues over which, he directed to come along with him and disclose the same to his brother. Accordingly, he accompanied him to his place where he found Arbind Singh son of Bhuwali Singh, Paro Singh son of Bhuwali Singh, Pappu Singh son of Bum Singh, Nawal Singh son of Dudheshwar Singh who were armed with lathi and danda, since before. Arbind Singh demanded the dues whereupon he said that in a day or two same will be paid, whereupon Kesho Singh, Arbind Singh, Paro Singh, Pappu Singh, Nawal Singh began to assault with lathi and danda as a result of which he sustained hurt over different parts of the body. They were joined by other persons also. Then, thereafter, they all threw him on the ground and Nawal Singh, Paro Singh, Pappu Singh pounced upon his chest and began to press. Then, thereafter, they both caught hold his hands and in order to kill, Arbind Singh poured acid in his both eyes as well as ears as a result of which, he felt erosion. Then thereafter, they lifted him and threw outside hospital premises located at outside of the village.

(3.) On the basis of the aforesaid fardbeyan Warsaliganj P.S. Case No. 92/2002 was registered and after completing investigation, charge sheet was submitted against accused Indradeo Singh, Sadan Singh and Vinit Singh who were not named in the FIR and against whom, it is evident from the lower court record that charge was framed and they were proceeded accordingly. During trial, six witnesses were examined at a first instance who happen to be PW.1-Satendra Prasad, PW.2-Nawal Singh, PW.3-Manoj Singh, PW.4-Ramakant Singh, PW.5-Indradeo Singh, PW.6-Ram Lakhan Singh. Then thereafter, prayer was made on behalf of informant Satendra Prasad Singh to allow examination of his family members and same was allowed vide order dated 16.06.2007 as a result of which Chhotan Singh was examined as CW.1, Kamla Devi as CW.2, Rinku Devi as CW.3 and Asha Devi as CW.4. It is also evident from the lower court record that while the trial was going on, a petition was filed on 31.10.2006 at the end of the informant to summon the appellants in accordance with Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. which was rejected by the learned lower court on 19-12-2006 which was challenged under Cr. Misc. No.5117/2007 and vide order dated 211.2007 the order dated 19.12.2006 rejecting the prayer of the informant to summon under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. was quashed with a direction to pass appropriate order and vide order dated 10.12.2008, Arbind Singh, Paro Singh, Pappu Singh, Nawal Singh (Appellants) and Kesho Singh were summoned and accordingly, their appearance completed on 002009. It is further evident from the order sheet that without framing of charge against the accused so summoned under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., the trial proceeded keeping the same for evidence which was lastly corrected on 11.05.2009, on which date charge was framed against them. Then thereafter, the case has been fixed for evidence. It is evident from the records that presence of only one witness Chhotan Singh has been procured after framing of charge which the learned lower court had also taken into consideration. However, considering Ext.A, B, C which happens to be the FIR of the counter case, charge sheet of the counter case and the judgment of the counter case, though acquitted Kesho Singh but convicted and sentenced the appellants Paro Singh, Arbind Singh, Paro Singh, Pappu Singh, Nawal Singh in a manner as indicated above. The aforesaid exercise has been taken up only to enlightened the learned lower court that in terms of Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. whenever an accused is being summoned, two options happen to be available before the court. (a) To proceed independently away from the main proceeding (b) To proceed in the same proceeding, and for that it happens to be solely within the wisdom of the court but, it has to be de-novo trial. For better appreciation, Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. is quoted below: