LAWS(PAT)-2019-4-193

SK. JABIR ALIAS TANGUR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On April 12, 2019
Sk. Jabir Alias Tangur Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the above stated appeals have arisen out of impugned Judgment of conviction and sentence order dtd. 29/4/1995 and 8/5/1995, respectively, passed by the learned 6th Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur in Sessions Trial No. 52 of 1994, by which and whereunder, he convicted all the appellants for the offences punishable under Ss. 302 read with Sec. 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life under the above stated Ss. . Furthermore, appellant Md. Khalique, Md. Salim, Sk Sajim and Sk Shamat were found guilty under Sec. 27 of the Arms Act, but no separate sentence for the offences punishable under Sec. 27 of the Arms Act was passed. However, no separate finding regarding the offences punishable under Sec. 147 and 148 of the I.P.C. was given by the learned trial Court. Since, the aforesaid criminal appeals have arisen out of common Judgment of conviction and sentence order, therefore, all the aforesaid criminal appeals were taken en-block and accordingly, the above stated criminal appeals are being disposed of by this common Judgment.

(2.) At the very outset, it is pertinent to note here that appellant No.2 in Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 114 of 1995, namely, Sk. Salim died during the pendency of the above stated criminal appeals and the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bhagalpur confirmed the death of the aforesaid appellant vide his letter No. 93, dtd. 24/2/2019. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 114 of 1995 filed on behalf of appellant No.2, namely, Sk. Salim stands abated in respect of the appellant No.2, namely, Sk. Salim only.

(3.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 6/8/1992 at about 4.30 A.M., P.W.4, namely, Md. Sahem gave his fardbeyan to P.W.10, namely, Deolal Ram at his house to this effect that in between night of 5/6/8/1992 at about 1.00 A.M., he woke up to urinate and saw that Sk. Mubarak, Sk. Khalique, Sk. Kalamul, Sk. Salim, Sk. Battu of his village having armed with three nut (country made pistol), Sk. Sajim, Sk. Sirajul, Sk. Mustaq having armed with double barrel gun, Sk. Sahamat having armed with rifle, Sk. Kalim having armed with big dagger, Sk. Abir @ Tengra and Sk. Gholta having armed with lathi entered in the court yard of his house and encircled his brother Sk. Riyasat, who was sleeping on a cot at Verandah of his house and thereafter, Sk Mubarak caught the hands of his brother and pulled him down from the cot and shot fire of country made pistol. After that Sk. Khalique and Sk. Kalamul, too, fired and, thereafter, Sk. Kalim gave indiscriminate blows to Sk. Riyasat by means of big dagger. P.W.4, further, claimed that he made attempt to save his brother, but Sajim assaulted him by means of butt of gun on his left shoulder as a result of which he fell down there and after that Sk. Gholta assaulted him by means of lathi causing injury on his right thumb. He, further, claimed that his wife (P.W.3), too, rushed to save him, but Sk. Mustaq assaulted her with butt of gun as a result of which, she, too, sustained injury on his right knee. He, further, claimed that the wife of deceased Riyasat (P.W.7) also came to save the deceased, but she was pushed by the aforesaid accused persons. P.W.4 further claimed that his brother sustained several injuries and his intestine came out and having sustained injuries, he died then and there. The above stated persons after committing the occurrence, fled away through western lane. P.W.4 disclosed that there was land dispute between him and the above stated F.I.R. named accused since last five years and 10 to 11 months prior to the alleged occurrence, Sk. Kalamul, Sk. Salamul, Sk. Khalique, Sk. Batto, Sk. Sajim etc. had caused injury to his brother by hurling bomb on him for which a Police Case was registered. He further claimed that on 5/8/1992 at about 7.00 P.M., Sk. Batto, Sk. Khalique, Sk. Sajim and Sk. Kalamul came to his house and pressurized to withdraw the case, but informant did not buckle upon the pressure of the aforesaid persons and in retaliation to the above stated incident, the F.I.R. named accused having made unlawful assembly committed the murder of his brother.