SAMIR @ JALIL @ SAMSUDDIN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals have been heard analogously as they arise out of the common judgment and order passed by the then 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Purnia, in Sessions Trial No. 455 of 1989 on 13.7.1990, whereby and whereunder, the accused-appellants of both the appeals along with another Maghu have been convicted under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.

(2.) As per prosecution case a dacoity was committed in the night between 4/5 October, 1988 at the house of Matiur Rahman and his two brothers situated contiguous to each other at village Tariya under Paharkatta Police Station in the district of Purnia. In course of the dacoity, brother of the informant, Matiur Rahman, namely, Azizur Rahman was killed by fire-arms by the dacoits. The informant's case, as is revealed from the fardbeyan which was lodged on the next date i.e., on 5.10.1988 before the police is that, on the previous night he was sleeping in his house but, rose up on hearing dogs barking towards the north side of the house. The informant flashed torch but, could not see anything then he came out of the house and sat in the varandah and started smoking. After a while some dacoits entered inside the angan by breaking the bamboo fencing and he heard one dacoit was uttering to kill the informant. Out of fear the informant fled away towards south and reached at the house of Salimuddin. His another brother Faizur Rahman, who was sleeping in his room, also followed him on hearing the sound of breaking of bamboo fencing and both of them from the house of Salimuddin flashed their torches and in the light of that flash they could recognise four accused-persons including the accused-appellants and another Maghu, who has not filed appeal. Besides the four accused-persons, they could also see several others numbering 17 to 18 persons in the angan having armed with bow and arrows and from their faces, it could be understood that they were of tribal origin. The dacoits entered inside the room and took away articles including a (sic) details of which have been in the fardbeyan itself. Worth Rs. 1,200/- and when the informant and his brother raised bulla then the villagers reached at the spot and the dacoits fled away by the way through which they had entered inside the house. The informant, his brother and other villagers chased the dacoits for some distance. As the dacoits were indulging in firing and out of fear they did not chase more and came back. When they returned home they found their brother Azizur Rahman lying dead in the varandah of his room. The injuries were found to be caused by fire-arms. On reaching home the informant and his brother disclosed the identification of the four dacoits before the villagers and the other inmates of the house. It was further mentioned in the fardbeyan that some days prior to the occurrence at Panjipara Hat the accused Maghu (non-appellant) had demanded a wrist watch from Azizur Rahman, the deceased brother of the informant. Azizur Rahman denied to return the same. After some days Maghu further demanded the wrist watch but, on denial being made by Azizur Rahman, he had threatened him of dire consequences. It was also alleged that on the previous day of the occurrence Maghu was seen roaming in the village in suspicious manner. It was alleged by the prosecution that occurrence was committed by Maghu and his associates for the previous grudge and also of the threatening as given to Azizur Rahman.

(3.) During the course of investigation, the houses of the accused-persons were searched but, nothing incriminating could be recovered and the accused-persons were found absconding. Ultimately on issuance of warrant of arrest by the Court at the instance of the Investigating Agency and issuance of processes under Sections 82/83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused-persons could be arrested at Sikkim with the help of Sikkim Police where the accused-persons were found to be earning through labour work. On being committed to Sessions, charges were framed against the accused persons under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code and when the same was read over and explained to the accused-persons, they pleaded not guilty.