Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 289 (PAT)

Baijnath Paswan v. State Of Bihar

2000-02-18

D.P.S.CHOUDHARY

body2000
Judgment D.P.S.Choudhary, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 23rd of September, 1996 passed by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Begusarai in Sessions Trial No. 418 of 1993, convicting the appellant Baijnath Paswan under Secs. 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter to as the I.P.C.) and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 10 years and 5 years respectively. His sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Originally four accused-persons were tried for the offence Under Secs. 395 and 412, I.P.C. but the remaining three accused-persons were found not guilty and were acquitted and discharged from the liabilities of their bail-bonds. One of the accused Ram Pukar Tanti died during the pendency of the trial and hence proceeding against him was ordered to be withdrawn. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that P.W. 5 (Bhagwan Mandal) in his fardbeyan (Ext. 3) recorded by P.W. 7 (Shakti Kumar, Verma), S.I. of Begusarai Town P.S. on 18.3.1993 at 12.30 hours in the field of Arjun Singh situated at Mohalla Miyachak Ratanpur, District Begusarai in which he alleged that on this day at 11.00 a.m. he opened the shop of golden ornaments belonging to his son Bijay Mandal. At 12.00 p.m. the wife of Kari Mallik came to his shop to pledge her silver Hasuli for Rs. 3,450.00 . While the information was giving the said amount to the-lady some of the dacoits entered inside the shop. One of the pointed pistol on him and asked to part with all the articles, including the cash. Thereafter, the dacoits started taking out ornaments arid cash etc. kept in the shop and in the cash book The informant caught hold one of the scuffling with him. In the mean time, another dacoit exploded bomb causing simple injury in the leg of the informant Several persons of the market assembled and the police party also arrived. The dacoits started running away who were chased by the local police arid also by the public. Two of the dacoits were apprehended and they Were assaulted at the hands of the local people. Arrested dacoits disclosed their names as Ram Pukar Tanti and Baijnath Paswan (appellant). They confessed their guilt and also disclosed the names of other accused person is with had accompanied them in the commission of dacoity. Two of the dacoits were apprehended and they Were assaulted at the hands of the local people. Arrested dacoits disclosed their names as Ram Pukar Tanti and Baijnath Paswan (appellant). They confessed their guilt and also disclosed the names of other accused person is with had accompanied them in the commission of dacoity. Prom the possession of Ram Pukar Tanti, some ornaments and cash Were recovered by the police. Seizure-list (Ext. 2/2) was prepared in presence of two independent Witnesses, namely, P.W. 1 (Ashok Thakur) and Ram Sagar Chaudhary (not examined) The appellant Baijnath Paswan was also searched in presence of independent witness and from his possession several ornaments and a cash amounting to Rs. 1,830.00 were recovered arid seized and another seizure-list. (Ext. 2/1) was prepared. The recovered ornaments and cash were identified on the spot by the informant and his family members belonging to their shop. Both the dacoits who had received injuries at the hands of public, were sent to Sadar Hospital, Begusarai for treatment. During the course of treatment accused Ram Pukar Tanti succumbed to the injuries. After completing investigation, charge-sheet was submitted and after commitment the trial proceeded in the Court below. 3. The case of the Defence is that accused has been falsely implicated because of enmity with the informant and local people. The accused-persons had gone to the shop of the informant to demand their articles, which they have pledged with the informant, but he was not returning those articles in spite of payment of the price, hence a dispute arose and informant and his family members assaulted the appellant and co-accused Ram Pukar Tanti and handed over to the police after giving a colour of dacoity. 4. On behalf of the prosecution in all seven witnesses have been examined, P.W. 6, Dr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Civil Assistant Surgeon of Sadar Hospital, Begusarai in his evidence stated that he found in all four injuries on the person of the injured (P.W. 5) caused by explosion of substance like bomb. He examined him on 18.3.1993 at 12.25 p.m. His injury report is marked Ext. 4. From the evidence of the Doctor, the prosecution case get support that P.W. 5 had received injuries of explosive substance and as per the prosecution case at the time of commission of dacoity the bomb was exploded by the dacoits. 5. He examined him on 18.3.1993 at 12.25 p.m. His injury report is marked Ext. 4. From the evidence of the Doctor, the prosecution case get support that P.W. 5 had received injuries of explosive substance and as per the prosecution case at the time of commission of dacoity the bomb was exploded by the dacoits. 5. P.W. 7 (Shakti Kumar Verma) is the I.O. of the case. He stated that on 18.3.1992 at 12.00 p.m. he was at the police station and heard the sound of explosion of bomb, thereafter along with policy party, the rushed towards the main market and reached near the jewellery shop of the informant. He learnt that a dacoity has been committed in the shop and people were chasing the dacoits. He along with the police party also chased the dacoits. Two dacoits were apprehended by the local people and they were assaulted. One of them was appellant Baijnath Paswan. Another one Ram Pukar Tanti died in the hospital due to the injuries sustained at the hands of the people. He had searched both the accused and recovered the looted cash, ornaments and other papers from the possession of both the dacoits. He prepared the seizure lists (Exts. 2/1 and 2/2). He also recovered some explosive substance at the place of occurrence, which he seized and prepared the seizure-list (Ext. 2). From the evidence of the I.O. the prosecution case gets corroboration that the dacoits had exploded bombs at the place of occurrence causing injury to P.W. 5 and recovered the looted articles from the possession of two dacoits who were apprehended at the place of occurrence, including the appellant. 6. P.W. 1 (Ashok Thakur) is local witness where the jewellery shop is situated. On hulla he came near the shop of the informant and had seen P.W. 5 (Bhagwan Mandal) scuffling with a dacoit and thereafter another dacoit hurled a bomb causing injury in the leg of the informant. He along with other local people had chased the dacoits and two of them were apprehended. He corroborated the evidence of the I.O. that from the possession of the arrested two accused-persons looted articles were, recovered. He proved his signature on the seizure-list which are marked Exts. 1 and 1/2. He along with other local people had chased the dacoits and two of them were apprehended. He corroborated the evidence of the I.O. that from the possession of the arrested two accused-persons looted articles were, recovered. He proved his signature on the seizure-list which are marked Exts. 1 and 1/2. He identified the appellant Baijnath Paswan in the dock and stated that he was arrested after chase near the place of occurrence along with another accused and looted articles were recovered from his possession. 7. P.W. 2 (Bhim Prasad) has a shop situated near the shop of the informant and he corroborated the evidence of the informant and P.W. 1 on the point of commission of dacoity and arrest of the accused along with another dacoit Ram Pukar Tanti by them. He also corroborated the recovery of looted articles from the possession of the appellant. Similar is the evidence of P.W. 3 (Ram Dayal Soni) who has also his shop on the main road near the shop of the informant. He has proved the signature of Ram Sagar Choudhary which is Ext. 1/3 on the seizure-list. He identified the appellant in the dock and stated that in his presence looted articles including the jewellery and cash were recovered from his possession. P.W. 4 (Kamdeo Singh) stated that at the alleged time of occurrence, he was at the main road of Begusarai. He heard the sound of bomb explosion and went near the shop of informant. He had seen the two dacoits being arrested by the local people and in his presence they were searched by the police party and looted articles were recovered from their possession. He identified the accused in the dock and stated that he was arrested after hot chase by the local people and stolen properties were recovered from their possession. 8. The evidence of the informant Bhagwan Mandal (P.W. 5) corroborates his fardbeyan and he stated that when he was giving Rs. 3,450.00 to a lady customer, at that time the dacoits entered inside his shop and at the point of pistol looted jewellery, cash, etc. He had caught one of the dacoits thereafter a bomb was hurled by the dacoits causing injury on his left leg. He further stated that local people arrived and on chase of the dacoits, two of them were arrested. In the meantime, police party arrived. He had caught one of the dacoits thereafter a bomb was hurled by the dacoits causing injury on his left leg. He further stated that local people arrived and on chase of the dacoits, two of them were arrested. In the meantime, police party arrived. From the possession of arrested dacoits looted articles, including cash, ornaments, etc. were recovered, which he identified belonging to him. He identified the accused-appellant in the dock and stated that he was one of the dacoits who was arrested on the spot and looted articles were recovered from his possession. 9. On the basis of the evidence discussed above the trial Court has come to the finding that prosecution has been able to substantiate the charge levelled against the accused-appellant Baijnath Paswan and convicted him for the offence under Secs. 395 and 412, I.P.C. and sentenced accordingly. The trial Court has come to the finding that on the point, of identification of the accused-appellant there is no ambiguity as the alleged occurrence took place in the day, the accused was apprehended at the place of occurrence by the local people, including the informant and the police party which arrived just after the occurrence has recovered the looted articles from his possession. As such, the factum of dacoity and participation of the accused-appellant in the said dacoity has been proved beyond all reasonable doubts. 10. The learned appellants lawyer did not contest the occurrence of dacoity or identification of the accused-appellant in his participation in the dacoity. The learned lawyer only submitted that he has served out the sentence for about seven years. Considering the fact that alleged dacoity took place in the year 1993 and the accused being a young person, who was found 24 years at the time of judgment, as such a lenient view may be taken and his period of sentence may be reduced to the period already undergone in custody. 11. After considering the facts, evident and circumstances of the case, I do not find any merit in this appeal, which is accordingly dismissed, but considering the age of the accused-appellant, who has remained in jail for about seven years, who he was never enlarged on, bail his period of sentence is reduced to the period already undergone in custody. The jail authority is directed to release the appellant forthwith, if hot wanted in any other-case. Issue release order. 12. The jail authority is directed to release the appellant forthwith, if hot wanted in any other-case. Issue release order. 12. With this modification in the judgment and order of the Court below, the appeal is dismissed.