LAWS(PAT)-1999-9-15

GANI MIAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On September 10, 1999
Gani Mian Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants who are father and son have been convicted under Section 395, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years by 2nd the Addl. Sessions Judge, West Champaran, in S. Tr. No. 109/89. Twelve other accused who were tried along with these appellants, have been acquitted because the trial Court was of the view that the evidence of identification of those accused was not trustworthy. The case of these two appellants was on a different footing. The evidence is that both the appellants were arrested by the villagers after the occurrence after two kilometres from the place of occurrence.

(2.) In the night of 9/10th August, 1984, when Bikram Singh of village Lachhanauta was sleeping in his house suddenly about 1,5 dacoits came from east. They entered in the Angan. The dacoits got the key from Bikram Singh and opened the Almirah and took away articles of the shop. The dacoits also took away box full of clothes and broke open lock of a box and took away ornaments which were hidden in the. ground. Some of the dacoits were holding gun and lathi. After committing the dacoity in the house of the informant, the dacoits committed dacoity in the house of Mohan Singh of same village. On hulla the villagers assembled and the dacoits ran away towards east of the village and while receding they exploded bomb thrice. The villagers Shivnath Singh, Arfin Sah, Wakil Sah, Arjani Moian, Hassan Imam, Ramlakhan Sah and others chased the dacoits and reached village Dhumli Barsa where these two appellants were apprehended by the villagers. On arrest they disclosed their names and village. The appellant Manzoor Mian belongs to village Ramnagar Miskartoli, P.S. Ramnagar and appellant Gani Mian belongs to village Bhat Dumri, P.S. Lauria.

(3.) According to the prosecution, a Jhola was recovered from the possession of Manzoor Mian containing a small bomb. The appellants also disclosed the names of their associates in presence of the witnesses and the Mukhia. The confessional statement was recorded in presence of Mukhia.