LAWS(PAT)-1999-9-93

BIRJU SAO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

Decided On September 07, 1999
Birju Sao Appellant
V/S
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by sole appellant is directed against judgment and order dated 30th September, 1991 passed by IVth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Patna in Sessions Trial No. 697/87 convicting and sentencing the appellant to undergo imprisonment for life u/s 302 IPC and RI for 3 years u/s 27 of Arms Act. Both the sentences have, however, been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the prosecution case is that on 14.12.86 the informant Umesh Sao (PW 2) along with his father Fakira Sah (deceased) after purchasing fertilizer in market was returning to his village. His father was ahead of him. At about 4.45 pm before sun set. when the informant and his father reached a pucca road situate east of their village the appellant armed with a country made pistol came out from an abandoned hut belonging to one Sia Saran Singh situate towards west of the road. The appellant surrounded the father of informant from front and fired on his chest. Father of informant after receiving injury on his chest tried to run away but he fell down and died on the spot. The informant and Sita Ram Singh (PW 3) chased the appellant but he managed to escape after giving them threatening with the pistol. On hearing the sound of firing Dularchand Jamadar (PW 5), Suresh Paswan (PW 1) and others came there and they also saw the appellant running away. About the motive of occurrence it is stated that on the same day in the morning an altercation between the father of informant and appellant had taken place over the matter of throwing garbage and appellant at that time had given threatening to the father of informant that he would kill him. The informant along with Village Chowkidar went to the police station on the same day at about 8.30 pm and got the FIR recorded. Chandrika Prasad (PW 6) the then officer - in - charge of Dhanurwa P.S. under whose jurisdiction the place of occurrence was lying, took up the investigation of the case, visited the place of occurrence, found the dead body of father of informant at the place of occurrence, prepared inquest report (Ext. 5), seized a bag of fertilizer, blood stained earth and a bullet from the place of occurrence, prepared seizure list (Ext. 2), recorded the statement of witnesses and after completion of investigation submitted charge -sheet u/s 302 I.P.C. and 27 of Arms Act against the appellant. After the commitment of the case to the court of Sessions the appellant was found guilty after framing of charges u/s 302 IPC and 27 of Arms Act. The defence of appellant as it appears from the trend of cross -examination of prosecution witnesses, before the court below was that he has been falsely implicated in this case.

(3.) DR . R.P. Shrivastava (PW 4) in his evidence has stated that on 15.12.86 he was posted as Tutor in Forensic Medicine at Patna Medical College & Hospital, Patna and on that day at about 11.30 am he held post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased and found a lacerated wound 3/4" x 1/2" x chest cavity deep with charred inverted margins below the inner and of left collar bone and on dissection underneath the injury the left chest wall in the first inter coastal space, the plura and the upper bone of left lung were pierced in one straight line. One alongeted bullet was found lodged in the lung tissues which was taken out and preserved. According to him injuries were antemortem and were caused by a fire arm and death was caused by these injuries and time elapsed since death was within 24 hours from the time of examination. He has proved post mortem examination reprot (Ext. 6). From the evidence of this witness it appears that the death of deceased was homicidal and the time of death corresponds with the time as alleged by prosecution.