SURAT LAL YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Surat Lal Yadav and Munu Lal Yadav are the two appellants who have filed this appeal against the judgment, dated 20th day of January, 19S4, passed in Sessions Case No. 21/80/83/82 by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Saharsa. By the aforesaid judgment the appellants have been convicted under Section 364 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the Code) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.

(2.) A Fardbeyan was recorded on 22-1-1979 at Bharrahi Out Post on the statements of Sukhdeo Yadav, the informant, who is P. W. 5. In the said Fardbeyan it was alleged that one Nikalal Yadav was married with Saraswati Devi of village Naraha and he was residing with his family members at the said village. He acquired property about two and half bighas from his earnings at Nepal in the name of his minor son, Ganga Yadav, in village Narha. It is said that Sarswati Devi, wife of Nikalal Yadav, developed illicit connection with the appellant No. 1, Surat Lal Yadav, due to which she deserted her husband and started living with Surat Lal Yadav at his house. The accused persons did not like Mikalal Yadav to remain in the village and he was tortured by the accused persons for which a Panchayati was held and appellant No. 1 Surat Lal Yadav, was held guilty. It has been also alleged that about fifteen days before recording of Fardbeyan, Munu Lal Yadav, appellant No. 2. came to Nikalal Yadav and told him that he had been called by appellant No. 1, Surat Lal Yadav, as his wife is ready to live with him. Nikalal Yadav went to village Naraha Tola and stayed in the house of appellant No. 1. In the night appellant No. 1 and other accused persons told Nikalal Yadav to transfer his land in the name of his wife, Sarswati Devi and then she will live with him. It is alleged that on Wednesday both the appellants came to village Mathahi and took Nikalal Yadav with them on the inducement that his wife is now ready to live with him and so he should go and bring her. Accordingly, they left village Mathahi but Nikalal Yadav never returned back to his village Mathahi. When Nikalal Yadav did not return, the nformant began to search for him and during that search it was disclosed to the informant by one Ram Narain Yadav, P. W. 1, and some others that his brother Nikalal Yadav has been murdered by appellant No. 1, Surat Lal Yadav, along with Pirthavi Lal Yadav, Narain Lal Yadav, Nunu Lal Yadav and Sarswati Devi after having hatched a conspiracy to kill Nikalal Yadav and that his deadbody has been thrown in Budhma Chhap. It is further stated that Sukhdeo Yadav, P. W. 5, when went to Budhma Chhap found an skeleton dead body lying in the Budhma Chhap. He then returned back to Bharrahi Out Post and lodged his Fardbeyan. The police recovered the deadbody from Budhma Chhap and sent it to hospital for post mortem examination and thereafter the skeleton was sent to Bhagalpur Medical College Forensic Science Laboratory. The report of the Forensic Science Laboratory was obtained on 4-4-1979. The Skeleton was identified as the skeleton of Nikalal Yadav by the informant, P. W. 5, Ganga Yadav. P. W. 4, the son of Nikalal Yadav and Ram Narain Yadav, P. W. 1, who is maternal brother-in-law of Nikalal Yadav. The Police, after investigation, submitted charge-sheet against the appellants along with four others under Sections 322/201 of the Code. The charges were framed against the appellants and four other accused persons under the aforesaid sections and after commitment they were put on trial and, as stated above, the appellants were convicted under Section 364 of the Code.

(3.) The defence version is that the appellants have been falesly implicated due to political rivalry between Narain Prasad Mukhiya and Subhas Babu Mukhiya as in the last election Subhas Babu Mukhiya succeeded and Narain Prasad Mukhiya was defeated and that appellant No. 1 was the Sipahi of Narain Babu. It is also the defence case that the informant, Sukhdeo Yadav, the brother of Nikalal Yadav, wanted to grab the property of Nikalal Yadav and so he has set up this false case and implicated the appellants and others. The appellants have denied the occurrence of the crime committed by them.