RAM JAPU RAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four appeals ariseout of the common judgment and order of the first Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi, in Sessions Trial No. 817 (sic) of 87/4 of 88, dated 6th April, 1989. The appellant Sudama Devi in Criminal Appeal 241 of 1989 was charged of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, while she and the remaining appellants were charged of the offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial Court has found appellant Sudama Devi guilty of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. It has also found all the appellants guilty of the offence under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code instead of Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, and while passing no separate sentence against Sudama Devi, has sentenced the other appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that on 29th May, 1987 at about 8 p.m. while the deceased was proceeding towards his house, appellant Sudama Devi called him and offered him Pera (sweetmeat), which was the prasad of Brahma Puja performed by her. The other appellants were also present at her house, and the deceased Ram Ishwar accepted that prasad and ate it. He thereafter proceeded to his house but felt unwell. By the time he reached his house he started vomiting and since his condition was deteriorating he was first taken to a doctor at Riga who advised that he should be taken to Sitamarhi hospital. While being taken to Sitamarhi hospital, Ram Ishwar (deceased) died and his dead body was, therefore, brought back to the village. On receiving information about the occurrence the Investigating Officer came to the village at about 5 p.m. and recorded the fardbeyan of the father of the deceased Mewa Lal Rai (P.W. 5).

(3.) In his fardbeyan which was recorded at 5.35 p.m. on 30th May, 1987 Mewa Lal (P.W. 5) stated that on 29-5-1987 his son was returning home at about 8 p.m. from the orchard to take his food. On reaching home his son told him that while returning home when he came near the house of appellant Sudama Devi she offered him Pera saying that she had performed Puja of Brahma and he should accept the prasad. At that time the remaining appellants except appellant Shailendra Rai were present. He asked her to offer the prasad to others but the appellants present there said that they had already taken the prasad. Thereafter his son ate the prasad and proceeded towards his house. On the way his head started reeling. He came home and told the informant all these facts. Thereafter he sat on the cot and started vomiting. He had also an attack of dysentery. Also present at the time were Mohan Rai (P.W. 2), Raj Mangal Rai (P.W.11), and Balbaha Thakur (P.W. 4) (Ram Bali Thakur alias Balbaha Thakur). Ram Ishwar (deceased) was taken in a jeep to Riga, but the doctor at Riga advised them to take Ram Ishwar (deceased) to Sitamarhi. They took Ram Ishwar (deceased) to Sitamarhi, but by the time they reached the town his son died. They, therefore, returned home with the dead body in the morning. On the basis of the fardbeyan a formal first information report was prepared and thereafter the case was investigated by Sri. D. N. Sinha, who was the then officer-in-charge of Riga Police Station.