Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 1145 (JHR)

Laljee Singh v. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)

2002-10-31

LAKSHMAN URAON, VISHNUDEO NARAYAN

body2002
Judgment Lakshman Uraon, J.-Appellants Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh (Cr. Appeal No. 139 of 1991) and Sudama Mistry (Cr. Appeal No. 131 of 1991) have been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. The other appellant, namely, Lalji Singh, Ram Prasad Singh and Rajendra Mistry (Cr. Appeal No. 131 of 1991) have been convicted under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. All the appellants have further been convicted under Sections 452 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code but no separate sentence has been awarded under these counts. Similarly Lalji Singh has further been convicted under Section 380 of the Indian Penal Code whereas others have been convicted under Section 380/149 of the Indian Penal Code but no separate sentence has been passed under those Sections. 2. The prosecution case, as per the statement (Ext.4) of the informant Radhika Singh (PW 7) recorded on 26.7.1987 at 7.15 a.m. is that on 25.7.1987 in the night at about 9.00 p.m. he was sitting on the Dhaba along with his Fyfe Nihora Singh, Fufu Bulki Devi (PW 6), mother Pushpa Devi (PW 4). grand-mother Bouran Devi, Grand-father Harihar Singh, sister Dilamati Kumari, brother Girja Singh and little children. Dilawati Kumari was cooking the food. At that time the door was opened. Appellants Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh Lillie Singh, Ram Ram Prasad Singh, Sudama Mistry, Rajendra Mistry, along with two unknown persons, armed with small pistols and torches, reached there. The unknown two criminals had big guns in their hands. Lantern was burning in the room and Dhibri was burning in the Dhaba. Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh enquired from the informant Radhika Singh as to whether Mohan Singh, who is in service, had come to home or not and slapped him twice. When he did not reply then Sudama Mistry went to Harihar Singh and assaulted him and asked as to where his son Mohan had gone. In the Dhaba Ram Prasad Singh and Rajendra Mistry (appellants) remained near the informant and others. Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh tied their hands with rope from behind. Thereafter, Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh entered into the room in search of Mohan Singh, asking that he is in service and maintaining the family members otherwise the family members would have died of hunger. Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh tied their hands with rope from behind. Thereafter, Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh entered into the room in search of Mohan Singh, asking that he is in service and maintaining the family members otherwise the family members would have died of hunger. He also asked the other associates to search Mohan Singh and to kill him. When Mohan Singh was not found, then Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh threatened Harihar Singh on the point of country made pistol to cause his murder only because he is Ojha and fired at him. Lalji Singh appellant took away utensils i.e. Ful Thali-5, Lata-4 and Batua-4. Thereafter he handed over those utensils to his associates. They also threatened the inmates of the family that if they would raise any Hulla, they will cause their murder also. In course of leaving the home of the informant, they locked the door. The informant saw that his grand-father Harihar Singh had sustained injury by the side of his nose and had died. The alleged occurrence took place only because the appellants were saying Harihar Singh to be an Ojha. In the year, 1984 also appellants Radha Singh, Ram Prasad Singh and Lalji Singh had assaulted Mohan Singh. They had also threatened Harihar Singh and Mohan Singh to cause their murders. The appellants had entered with an intention to cause the murder of Mohan Singh. On search when Mohan Singh was not found in the home, as he had not returned from his service place at Daltonganj, then they caused murder of Harihar Singh. From the space of northern side of Dhaba he came out and unlocked the chain of the door. As it was night hence out of fear he did not go anywhere. In the morning he went to Daltonganj to inform his uncle Mohan Singh and thereafter, they went to the police station and informed the police. His statement was recorded on which he signed (Ext.2) and it was also signed by Mohan Singh (Ext. 2/1 ). 3. In the present case the prosecution has examined altogether 12 witnesses to prove its case. As it was night at 9.00 p.m., the informant (P.W. 7) Radhika Singh along with all the family members was at home and his Fufu Bulki Devi (PW 6), Fufa Nihora Singh, grand-mother, grand-father, sister and other children were also there. 2/1 ). 3. In the present case the prosecution has examined altogether 12 witnesses to prove its case. As it was night at 9.00 p.m., the informant (P.W. 7) Radhika Singh along with all the family members was at home and his Fufu Bulki Devi (PW 6), Fufa Nihora Singh, grand-mother, grand-father, sister and other children were also there. His parents were on the western side of the Dhaba. At that time all the appellants, namely, Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh, Lalji Singh, Ram Prasad Singh, Sudama Mistry, Rajendra Mistry and two unknown persons reached there. Each of the appellants had pistols and torches in their hands whereas the unknown persons had big guns and torches. In the Dhaba a Dhibri was burning and in the room a lantern was burning. The informant claimed to have identified the appellants in the light of Dhibri and lantern. All the appellants are of the same village. Appellant Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh enquired from this witness (informant) about Mohan Singh. When he informed that Mohan was at Daltonganj and had not returned home on that day, then he (informant) was slapped by Radha Singh. Appellant Sudama Mistry asked Harihar Singh as to where his son Mohan was and when he also replied that Mohan Singh had not come home then appellant Sudama Mistry and Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh dragged Harihar Singh from the Dhaba and took him inside the room in search of Mohan Singh. Appellant Rajendra Mistry and Ram Prasad Singh scattered the grains and wheat on the floor which was kept in sacks. Lalji Singh ordered to kill Harihar Singh. Then Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh with his pistol fired, causing injury on the right side of cheek of Harihar Singh. Appellant Sudama Mistry fired with pistol and caused injury on the auxiliary region. Harihar Singh on being injured died instantaneously. Thereafter, Lalji took four Batua, 5 Ful Thali, 6 Lota, ornaments and some cash amount. While leaving the home of the informant, they threatened not to raise any Hulla and bolted the chain of the door from outside. They murdered Harihar Singh saying that he was Ojha. The informant along with Jago Singh went to Daltonganj and informed Mohan Singh about the alleged occurrence. The dead body of Harihar Singh was kept in Dhaba. While leaving the home of the informant, they threatened not to raise any Hulla and bolted the chain of the door from outside. They murdered Harihar Singh saying that he was Ojha. The informant along with Jago Singh went to Daltonganj and informed Mohan Singh about the alleged occurrence. The dead body of Harihar Singh was kept in Dhaba. They went to Chainpur Police Station where the statement of the informant was recorded, on which he signed (Ext. 2). The Investigating Officer after recording the First Information Report, went to the P.O. village and saw the dead body of Harihar Singh. The alleged occurrence took place only due to enmity as in the year, 1984 also there was Marpit resulting institution of case against Mohan Singh and others in which they were acquitted and due to that criminal case, they have caused the murder. They had intention to cause murder of Mohan Singh but when he was not met, then Harihar Singh was murdered. At night it was raining heavily and hence none of the villagers went to the house of the informant. In the morning when the informant was likely to go to Daltonganj then Jago Singh and Balgovind Singh reached his house. The informant informed only Mohan Singh about the alleged occurrence and none else. He has stated before the Investigating Officer that Harihar Singh, his grand-father, was shot by Sudama Mistry near the auxiliary region with pistol whereas Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh fired with pistol causing injury on the right cheek. In the First Information Report, the informant Radhika Singh has not stated anything regarding opening of fire with pistol by Sudama Mistry, causing injury to Harihar Singh on his right auxiliary region. 4. Dr. Krishna Murari Sah (PW 1) on 26.7.1987 at 3.45 p.m. conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of Harihar Singh and found (i) lacerated wound on right auxiliary region 4" x 2 1/2" x inverted margin. Tattooing was present with scattered pellets. There was no wound of exit, (ii) lacerated wound on the right side of the face extending from mid of the nose up to chin. Margin was inverted: Tattooing was present with scattered pellets. There was no wound of exit. On dissection (i) Large haematoma on the auxiliary area and major auxiliary arteries were distorted. There was no wound of exit, (ii) lacerated wound on the right side of the face extending from mid of the nose up to chin. Margin was inverted: Tattooing was present with scattered pellets. There was no wound of exit. On dissection (i) Large haematoma on the auxiliary area and major auxiliary arteries were distorted. Wades three in number were lying beneath the wound and (ii) Large laceration of the facial vessels with multiple haematoma were present. Wades three in number and pellets four in number were sealed and handed over to the Hawildar. This witness has opined that the injuries were inflicted by fire arm caused by two different shots. The cause of death was due to shock and haemorrhage resulting from the abovementioned injuries. The time elapsed since death was 6 to 48 hours since the post mortem examination. Injury no.1 was sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. This witness in his pen and signature prepared the post-mortem report (Ext.1). In his cross-examination the doctor (PW 1) has deposed that he did not find blackening and charring in any of the two injuries. Both the injuries were possible by two shots by one man with the same gun. The injuries were also possible by pistols. He could not say about the type of fire arm used in the alleged murder. The injuries might have been caused from a distance of about 4 ft. He could not differentiate the injuries caused by gun and a pistol. He is even not aware of the Modi's Jurisprudence that pistol and gun shot injuries would have different effect. 5. Mohan Singh (PW 2), son of the deceased, was lucky enough as he had not come home as usual on Sunday from Daltonganj. He is not the eye witness but he was informed by the informant Radhika Singh (PW 7) that appellants Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh, Lalji Singh, Ram Prasad Singh, Sudama Mistry, Rajendra Mistry and others along with two unknown persons jointly had entered into his home and murdered Harihar Singh and thereafter took away utensils. He was also informed that Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh and Sudama Mistry opened one fire each, resulting the death of his father Harihar Singh. He was also informed that Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh and Sudama Mistry opened one fire each, resulting the death of his father Harihar Singh. When informed, he went to the Chainpur Police Station along with the informant and Jago Singh where the statement of Radhika Singh was recorded on which he signed. This witness also signed on it (Exts. 2 and 2/1 respectively). This witness has deposed that all these five appellants had threatened earlier also to cause murder of his father Harihar Singh, saying him to be an Ojha. His father was also not allowed to pass through the public road. This witness was also assaulted earlier by appellant Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh, Lalji Singh and Ram Prasad Singh and they had threatened him and his father to cause murder. Appellant Sudama Mistry and Rajendra Mistry had also threatened to cause murder of his father and of his own. When he went along with the Investigating Officer to his home, then he found his father dead, having sustained injuries on his right cheek and right ribs near auxiliary region due to fire arm. 6. PW 3 (Chandan Singh) was sitting in the western side of the room along with his family and children at about 9.00 p.m. In the eastern side there is a cowshed. In between the room and cowshed there is a Dhaba. His parents were sitting in the Dhaba along with Radhika Singh, Julawali Kumari, Girja Singh and other children. When he heard saying "tie and assault" then he went to the Dhaba where his parents were sitting and there he saw appellants Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh, Lalji Singh, Ram Prasad Singh, Sudama Mistry, Rajendra Mistry and two unknown persons. All these five appellants had pistols and torches in their hands. In the Dhaba a Dhibri was burning and the oven was also burning. In the nearby room lantern was burning. This witness identified all the five appellants in the light of Dhibri, lantern and burning oven. The appellant Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh asked Harihar Singh that he is Ojha and has damaged many people and therefore, he was threatened to be killed. Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh was searching Mohan Singh, threatening to kill him. Thereafter, Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh went to the Dhaba and took Harihar Singh inside the room where the lantern was burning. Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh was searching Mohan Singh, threatening to kill him. Thereafter, Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh went to the Dhaba and took Harihar Singh inside the room where the lantern was burning. Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh fired with his pistol, causing injury on the right cheek. Appellant Sudama Mistry also fired, causing injury on the right auxiliary region. On being injured father of this witness Harihar Singh died. Appellant Lalji Singh, Rajendra Mistry, Ram Prasad Singh and two others thereafter took 4 Batuas, 6 Lota, 10 Thali and cash of Rs. 2000/-. The police came to the village in the next morning and prepared inquest report of the dead body on which this witness signed (Ext. 2/2). Another witness Shivnath Singh also signed on it (Ext. 2/3). The police did not seize the Dhibri and lantern. The Investigating Officer found blood stained grains on the floor, which were seized by the Investigating Officer. There was blood stains on the Sari of his mother while she had picked up Harihar Singh. The sari was seized by the police. As it was raining at night, hence even on Hulla raised by this witness, none of the villagers went there. 7. PW 4 Pushpa Devi daughter-in-law of Harihar Singh, was in the adjacent western side of the room along with her husband (PW 3). When she heard Hulla, then she went along with her husband into the eastern room. They saw Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh, Lalji Singh, Ram Prasad Singh, Sudama Mistry, Rajendra Mistry and two unknown persons. Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh (appellant) had pistol and torch in his hand and the others had also torches and pistols in their hands whereas the unknown two persons had big guns and torches. She claimed to have identified all the appellants in the burning Dhibri in the Dhaba and burning lantern in the room. Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh asked about Mohan Singh. Appellant Rajendra Mistry informed that Harihar Singh was Ojha, who used to trouble the villagers and hence he would be killed. Lalji Singh ordered to kill Harihar Singh. Then Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh fired with pistol on his cheek and Sudama Mistry fired with his pistol, causing injury on his right auxiliary region. Harihar Singh died at the spot. He was murdered only due to his being an Ojha. 8. Lalji Singh ordered to kill Harihar Singh. Then Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh fired with pistol on his cheek and Sudama Mistry fired with his pistol, causing injury on his right auxiliary region. Harihar Singh died at the spot. He was murdered only due to his being an Ojha. 8. P.W.S Fauzdar Singh is the witness on the inquest report on which he has signed (Ext.3). PW 6 Bulki Devi, Fufu of the informant, has also corroborated the statement of the informant (PW 7), Pushpa Devi (PW 4) and Chandan Singh (PW 3). She is daughter of deceased Harihar Singh. 9. PW 9 Chhathu Mahto and PW 10 Radha Singh son of late Sri Bilas Singh are hostile witnesses. PW 11 Ram Dular Singh, Hawildar, had gone to the P.O., village-Basaria Kala along with the then Officer Incharge Surendra Nath Sharma. He took the dead body of Harihar Singh for postmortem examination to the Sadar Hospital, Daltonganj. After post-mortem examination the doctor handed over pellets and wades to him, kept in a Shishi (Material Ext.1). He also received post mortem examination report. PW 12 Abdul Rahman, Incharge of Sadar Court Malkhana, Daltonganj, had produced the blood stained soil in connection with Chainpur Police Case No. 82 of 1987 (Material Ext. II). 10. PW 8 Suresh Chandra Sharma, Investigating Officer of this case, has recorded the statement of Radhika Singh, who had gone there at the Police Station along with his uncle Mohan Singh and cousin brother Jago Singh. He went to the place of occurrence and found the dead body of Harihar Singh in the Dhaba on a Khat. He also found wheat and grams scattered in the room. There was blood spot also in the room. The construction of house is ‘L’ type. He prepared inquest report (Ext.3) and sent the dead body for post-mortem examination. He seized blood stained soil in presence of the witnesses and prepared seizure list but the said seizure list was not brought on the record. He found blood on the right cheek, right ear and right auxiliary region on the person of the deceased. 11. Although the village of the informant (PW 7) consists of 500 houses and forty houses are nearby his house, but even on Hulla, none went to his house. Even at night he did not go out of his home to inform any body else. 11. Although the village of the informant (PW 7) consists of 500 houses and forty houses are nearby his house, but even on Hulla, none went to his house. Even at night he did not go out of his home to inform any body else. In the morning when the informant Radhika Singh (PW 7) was likely to go to Daltonganj to inform his uncle Mohan Singh, then he met Jago Singh and Balgovind Singh. He never disclosed before them about the alleged occurrence, which took place at night. His uncle Mohan Singh (PW 2) was in service at Daltonganj. The informant along with Jago Singh went from Village-Basaria-Kala passing through Chainpur Police Station. He did not go to Chainpur Police Station to lodge any informant (sic) rather he went to Daltonganj and along with his uncle Mohan Singh (PW 2) went to Chainpur Police Station where his statement was recorded on which PW 2 Mohan Singh also signed. Although PW 2 Mohan Singh was present when the statement of PW 7 Radhika Singh was recorded, even then none of them informed the Investigating Officer about the fire opened by Sudama Mistry, causing injury on the right auxiliary region of Harihar Singh. Thus, both of them including the other interested witnesses, who are all family members, namely, Chandan Singh (PW 3), Pushpa Devi (PW 4) and Bulki Devi (PW 6) have developed their statements in course of their examination in the court that Sudama Mistry opened fire with his pistol, by touching the body of Harihar Singh, causing injury on his right auxiliary region. This is only because after post mortem examination, the doctor found two injuries on the person of the deceased Harihar Singh. They have tried to corroborate the medical evidence by ocular evidence in course of their examination in court, which they had not stated earlier in the First Information Report. PW 7 (informant) was at home at the night of the alleged occurrence. At night out of fear, he did not come out of his home to inform the villagers. He has taken the plea that it was raining heavily and so even on his Hulla none of the villagers came to his house. Even in the morning when he met Balgovind and Jago he never disclosed before them the name of the assailants and the alleged occurrence, which took place in the night. He has taken the plea that it was raining heavily and so even on his Hulla none of the villagers came to his house. Even in the morning when he met Balgovind and Jago he never disclosed before them the name of the assailants and the alleged occurrence, which took place in the night. The informant although went to Daltonganj, passing through Chainpur Police Station, but he did not go to the Police Station to inform the police rather he went to inform his uncle and along with his uncle he went to the Police Station Chainpur where his first information was recorded. 12. The Investigating Officer (PW 8) had gone to the place of occurrence. He saw the dead body and found dried blood spot beneath the Khat where the dead body of Harihar Singh was kept. He also found blood stained soil which he seized and prepared seizure list, but neither the seizure list prepared by him nor the blood stained soil seized by him have been brought on record to support his statement, as deposed in the court. 13. The doctor (PW 1) did not find blackening and charring in any of the two injuries, which were caused by two different shots although he found pellets-4 in number and wades-3 in number on dissection from injury no. (i). As the witnesses, who are interested, have deposed that Sudama Mistry and Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh opened fire with their respective pistols, causing injury on the right auxiliary region and on the right cheek from mid nose up to chin. It was close range firing touching Harihar Singh but the doctor did not find any blackening and charring in any of the two injuries, which shows that the fire was not opened from a very close range. Enmity was there, as admitted by the informant and PW 2, regarding previous criminal case, instituted by PW 2 against some of the appellants in which they were acquitted. The second reason to cause murder of Harihar Singh was that he was exorcist (Ojha). The means of identification was Dhibri and lantern but they were not seized by the Investigating Officer. The allegation against the appellants Lalji Singh and Ram Prasad Singh is that they scattered the grains and got seated Harihar Singh on it. Appellant Rajendra Mistry was ordering to kill him. The means of identification was Dhibri and lantern but they were not seized by the Investigating Officer. The allegation against the appellants Lalji Singh and Ram Prasad Singh is that they scattered the grains and got seated Harihar Singh on it. Appellant Rajendra Mistry was ordering to kill him. PW 2 Mohan Singh, son of the deceased Harihar Singh, is a hearsay witness. PW 3 Chandan Singh and PW 4 Pushpa Devi (wife of Chandan Singh) have claimed to have gone into the room of Harihar Singh, where he was shot at by appellant Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh and Sudama Mistry. PW 3 Chandan Singh has stated that Harihar Singh sustained injury on his right cheek including nose due to the fire opened by Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh and on his right auxiliary region due to the fire, opened by appellant Sudama Mistry. He has not stated that when Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh fired causing injury on the right cheek touching the nose then he fell down and when he fell down then Sudama Mistry fired with pistol, causing injury on the right auxiliary region. 14. PW 6 Bulki Devi, daughter of deceased Harihar Singh, has deposed that when first firing was opened by Radha Singh, causing injury on the right cheek, then Harihar Singh fell down flat and then second firing was shot by appellant Sudama Mistry, causing injury on his right auxiliary region. Both the firings were made by touching the body of Harihar Singh, as deposed by this witness (PW 6). The other witnesses have also deposed regarding firing by two shots touching the body of Harihar Singh. But as the doctor has deposed that he did not find any blackening and charring mark, it creates doubt in the manner of the alleged occurrence. Moreover except PW 6, the other witnesses, namely, PW 3 Chandan Singh, PW 4 Pushpa Devi and PW 7 Radhika Singh (informant) have stated that the firing was done from a very close range, touching the body of Harihar Singh. This evidence is further belied that none of the witnesses, except PW 6 Bulki Devi, has deposed that appellant Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh opened fire causing injury on the right cheek, as it was fired pointing pistol on the nose. This evidence is further belied that none of the witnesses, except PW 6 Bulki Devi, has deposed that appellant Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh opened fire causing injury on the right cheek, as it was fired pointing pistol on the nose. They have not deposed that due to this fire arm injury Harihar Singh fell down and then appellant Sudama Mistry opened fire causing injury on his right auxiliary region. If the evidence of this witness is believed, then as per her evidence, both the firings were made from the front side. It may be believable that by touching the nose Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh opened fire, causing injury but in that position, if second fire was opened by Sudama Mistry from the front side, then it is very difficult to say that Harihar Singh sustained injury by fire arm on his right auxiliary region instead of being 'injured on his frontal portion of the body, chest and other portions. If the evidence of PW 6 Bulki Devi is believed that when Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh opened fire and injured Harihar Singh on his right cheek, touching the nose and chin, thereafter, he fell down flat. In that position if Sudama Mistry had opened fire touching the body, then it would have caused injury on the front side of cheek or abdomen of Harihar Singh but the injury was on the right auxiliary region. 15. The First Information Report was lodged by PW 7 Radhika Singh when he went to Daltonganj passing Chainpur Police Station, without informing the villagers at night or even in the morning or even in his way to the Chainpur Police. Straightway he went to Daltonganj. There he informed his uncle PW 2 (Mohan Singh) and thereafter, both of them went to Chainpur Police Station, where the statement of Radhika Singh was recorded. The conduct of Radhika Singh (informant) also creates doubt in my mind as to what prevented him to inform the villagers, who were 40 in numbers having their houses adjacent to the house of the informant in a village consisting of about 500 houses. None of the villagers went to his home. This conduct of the interested witnesses does not appeal in my mind. None of the villagers went to his home. This conduct of the interested witnesses does not appeal in my mind. PW 9 Chhatthu Mahto and PW 10 Radha Singh, independent village witnesses, have not supported the case of the prosecution and, therefore, they have been delcared hostile by the prosecution. 16. The interested witnesses have not alleged any overt act committed by the appellants Lalji Singh, Ram Prasad Singh and Rajendra Mistry. These witnesses have deposed that Lalji Singh and Ham Prasad Singh scattered grams and wheat inside the room by tearing the sacks and on that grain Harihar Singh was asked to sit. The allegation against appellant Rajendra Mistry is that he ordered to kill Harihar Singh. All these appellants were unarmed. 17. Mohan Singh (PW 2) is a hearsay witness. The informant (PW 7) named Sudama Mistry as one of the assailants, who opened fire with pistol causing injury on the right auxiliary region of Harihar Singh. The other three appellants Lalji Singh, Ram Prasad Singh and Rajendra Mistry have not taken any active role by committing any overt act to cause murder of Harihar Singh. The allegation against all these appellants is that they had gone to the house of the informant to cause murder of Mohan Singh (PW 2) but when he was not met, then Harihar Singh was murdered only because he was an Exorcist (Ojha). The genesis of the alleged occurrence is that Harihar Singh was practicing Ojhai. Secondly Mohan Singh (PW 2) had instituted a criminal case against the appellants in which they were acquitted. Due to acquittal, they became emboldened and caused murder of Harihar Singh. This second genesis regarding criminal case, instituted against the appellants by PW 2 Mohan Singh, was also not brought on record. 18. To sum up, I find that the witnesses have given contradictory statements regarding the matter of the alleged occurrence. In the First Information Report there is no mention of opening fire by appellant Sudama Mistry but subsequently the witnesses have deposed that both Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh and Sudama Mistry opened fire by touching the body of Harihar Singh. This statement is belied by the evidence of PW 1, Dr. Krishna Murari Sah, who did not find any blackening or charring mark on either of the two injuries. This statement is belied by the evidence of PW 1, Dr. Krishna Murari Sah, who did not find any blackening or charring mark on either of the two injuries. The manner of the alleged occurrence has also been contradicted as to whether Harihar Singh was shot when he was taken inside the room in standing position or whether he was asked to sit on the grains scattered in the room or whether second firing was made by Sudama Mistry when Harihar Singh fell down on being injured by the first firing opened by appellant Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh. Moreover, the informant and other inmates of the family remained inside the home. They never came out to raise any hue and cry to inform the villagers nor any villager went to his home on hearing Hulla. The informant or any of the family members should have gone out and informed the villagers. Even in the morning they did not go to any villager to inform them rather while on his way to Daltonganj, the informant Radhika Singh (PW 7) met Jago Singh and Balgovind Singh, whom also he did not inform about the alleged occurrence. Moreover independent village witnesses have not been examined by the prosecution. On his way to Daltonganj, the informant crossed Chainpur Police Station, but he did not inform there. Even on his way from Village-Basaria-Kala to Daltonganj, he did not inform anyone about the alleged occurrence except Mohan Singh (PW 2). All these conducts are addition in creating doubt in my mind about the occurrence and offence, as alleged to have been committed by these appellants. In view of these facts, I come to the conclusion that the benefit of doubt should go to the appellants. 19. In the result, both the Criminal Appeals are allowed and the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, passed against these appellants by the learned court below, in Sessions Case No. 337 of 1988, are hereby set aside. 20. As the appellants of Cr. Appeal No. 131 of 1991, namely, Sudama Mistry, Lalji Singh, Ram Prasad Singh and Rajendra Singh, are on bail, they are discharged from the liabilities of their bail bonds. So far appellant Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh in Cr. 20. As the appellants of Cr. Appeal No. 131 of 1991, namely, Sudama Mistry, Lalji Singh, Ram Prasad Singh and Rajendra Singh, are on bail, they are discharged from the liabilities of their bail bonds. So far appellant Radha Singh alias Ragho Singh in Cr. Appeal No. 139 of 1991 is concerned, as he is in custody, he is ordered to be set at liberty forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. Vishnudeo Narayan, J.-I agree.