Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 339 (PAT)

Muni Lal Paswan v. State Of Bihar

2002-03-13

B.N.P.SINGH

body2002
Judgment 1. The appellants suffered conviction under Sec. 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term ten years on accusation that on 16/01/1990, in the early hours of morning, when Bindeswari Devi (PW 1) had gone to fetch water from the handpump, a protest was registered by Muni Lal Paswan, who had been claiming the hand pump to have been installed at his instance. It was alleged that there was exchange of abuses between them, pursuant to which on call given by Muni Lal Paswan, other appellants came there holding wooden substance with them and in quick succession, Muni Lal Paswan dealt blows with the spade on the head of Bindeshwari Devi, after Mohit had caught hold of her. It was alleged that when other family members including Lachchia Devi, Saraswati Devi, Sheoji Paswan and others came for rescue of Bindeswari Devi , they too were intended to be assaulted and after they rushed to their houses, they too were assaulted by the appellants when Sarastwati Devi, Sheoji Paswan and others suffered injuries on their persons. The injured were carried to Purnea Hospital where statement of Sheoji Paswan (PW 3) was recorded by the Police, which formed the basis of the first information report, drawn up at the Police Station. 2. After the Police was set in motion, investigation commenced and, in course of investigation, the Police recorded statement of a number of witnesses under Sec. 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, got the injured clinically examined by the doctor inspected the place of occurrence, and on conclusion of investigation, laid charge sheet before the Court. In the eventual trial, the State examined altogether nine witnesses and also brought on the record, some documents which are the injury reports and also admission register of the Purnea Hospital. The witnesses examined by the State also include Bindeswari Devi and also Sheoji Paswan, who were injured in the incident. The State also examined two doctors who examined the injured and also the Police Officer who visited the place of occurrence. 3. The defence of the appellants before the Court below and also this Court had been denial of the allegations and false implication, due to persisting land dispute between the parties with regard to installation of the hand pump. The State also examined two doctors who examined the injured and also the Police Officer who visited the place of occurrence. 3. The defence of the appellants before the Court below and also this Court had been denial of the allegations and false implication, due to persisting land dispute between the parties with regard to installation of the hand pump. The defence of the appellants was also that Bindeshwari Devi suffered injury on her person due to fall on a hard substance and, the trial Court while negativing contentions raised on behalf of the appellants, rendered verdict of guilt, finding the appellants guilty under Sec. 307/149, IPC and sentenced them in the manner stated above. 4. The bona fide of the prosecution case was sought to be assailed by the learned counsel for the appellants on premises that though Bindeshwari Devi (PW 1) and Sheoji Paswan (PW 3) had been stating before the trial Court that a large number of persons had flocked to the place of occurrence during the incident, it would be found that only family members and interested witnesses were examined at trial, entirely to the exclusion of those persons who could have been competent and independent witnesses. Contentions were raised at Bar that persisting land dispute with regard to the hand pump between the parties had been admitted by all the witnesses examined by the State and, hence false implication of the appellants could have been ruled out. The injuries noticed on the person of Bindesh-wari Devi, due to fall on a hard substance, could not be disbelieved, in view of tacit admission of the witnesses about Bindeshwari Devi having fallen on rocky surface pursuant to the receipt of the injuries on her person. In quick succession, it is sought to be urged that since the appellants had not joined the assembly at the first instance, no common intention can possibly be attributed to them, and even by legal fiction they were not answerable with the aid of Sec. 149, IPC and the last argument canvassed at Bar on behalf of the appellants was that Muni Lal Paswan remained in custody for about 14 months, both as undertrial prisoner and also during post conviction period. As for other appellants, it is urged that they too remained in custody for about a month. As for other appellants, it is urged that they too remained in custody for about a month. Learned counsel for the State would resist the contentions raised on behalf of the appellants. 5. The facts of the case are not in much details, as they suggest that after Bindeswari Devi had gone to the hand pump to fetch water, she was resisted by Muni Lal Paswan. There was exchange of abuse between them, pursuant to which, on call of Muni Lal Paswan, the other appellants came there holding wooden substance with them and it was Muni Lal who dealt with blows with spade on the head of Bindeshwari Devi when she suffered bleeding injuries on her person. It is admitted that no other appellants were attributed to have dealt blows on Bindeshwari Devi and the only accusation against them was that after other family members came for rescue and ran to their house, they were assaulted by the appellants when Saraswati Devi and Sheoji Paswan suffered injuries on their persons. These accusations too were quite omnibus in nature about to her appellants, who were eight in numbers and that apart, the injuries suffered by Saraswati Devi and Sheoji Paswan were simple in nature. Kokhan Paswan (PW 4) had turned volte face to the State and there was nothing material in his evidence to merit consideration. However, so far as Mahendra Paswan (PW 5) was concerned, he was a witness to the assault on Bindes-wari Devi who suffered bleeding injury on her person and all the appellants were standing there with hard and blunt substance. Ram Niwas Tiwari (PW 8), who happens to be the Investigating Officer, found the place of occurrence adjacent east to the house of Sheoji Paswan which was near the place where hand pump was installed on a Government land. The Police Officer signs of violence on the place of occurrence, as blood marks were there and the Police Officer also noticed broken tiles. However, the Police Officer did not notice any stone or hard rock near the hand pump. Md. Ali Hasan (PW 7) was a compounder attached to the Purnea Hospital who brought on the record certain entries recorded in the admission register and the hand writing of Dr. Sheo Shankar Prasad. However, the Police Officer did not notice any stone or hard rock near the hand pump. Md. Ali Hasan (PW 7) was a compounder attached to the Purnea Hospital who brought on the record certain entries recorded in the admission register and the hand writing of Dr. Sheo Shankar Prasad. The two doctors examined by the State, stated in positive terms that they noticed incised wounds on parietal region of scalp of Bindeshwari Devi Evidence of doctor Nagendra Prasad Singh (PW 9) would suggest that fracture was noticed in the skull and the injury in the estimation of the doctor was grievous in nature. Though there were other injuries on her person they were simple in nature caused by hard and blunt substance. 6. Though the trial Court formulated a question as to whether other members knew before hand that the offence actually committed, was likely to be committed in prosecution of the common object, and such knowledge may reasonably be inferred from the nature of assembly, it arrived to erroneous conclusion about the appellants having shared the common intention with that of Muni Lal Paswan. The trial Court also drew unwarranted conclusion on the premises that the accused persons who had assembled on the spot, on the call given by Muni Lal Paswan, had joined the common object so far assault on Bindeshwari Devi was concerned and found them answerable under Sec. 149, IPC also on wrong premises that since none of them objected to the lead taken by Muni Lal Paswan, they were answerable for their conviction on that count, and lastly the conclusion drawn by the trial Court cannot be appreciated by any canon when following observations were recorded." The matter would have been different, if the accused after causing injury had restrained themselves from committing other offences i.e. hurling bricks and smashing roof of the house of the informant, but their incessant marpit demonstrates their common object to do away with the life of the person who ever comes in their way." Even though P.Ws. 4 and 5 had turned volte face to the State and narrations made by them was not in conformity with the statements rendered by the Police, the trial Court evaluated their evidences on wrong perspective, as it was observed that "so far as the evidence of P.W. Nos. 4 and 5 had turned volte face to the State and narrations made by them was not in conformity with the statements rendered by the Police, the trial Court evaluated their evidences on wrong perspective, as it was observed that "so far as the evidence of P.W. Nos. 4 and 5 are concerned, they cannot be brushed aside merely on the ground, that they were declared hostile, because the I.O. with whom no enmity had been pleaded by any of the witnesses, is not expected to record the false statement u/S. 161, Cr. P.C." 7. Since other appellants had not come together with Muni Lal Paswan and, much less there was any explicit accusation against them about assault on Bindeshwari Devi, conviction recorded by the trial Court under Sec. 307/149, IPC was not sustainable in law. However, so far as Muni Lal Paswan was concerned, there had been coherent narrations made by Bindeshwari Devi, Sarswati Devi and Sheoji Paswan about he being the author of the injuries sustained by her. It is admitted that there was no accusation against Muni Lal Paswan about repetition of blow on Bindeshwari Devi, and that apart, there was not even intervening circumstances to desist him to translate his design into action. Dr. N. P. Singh (P.W. 9) has ruled out possibility of such injuries by fall on rock and on these premises while setting aside the conviction of Muni Lal Paswan under Sec. 307/149, IPC, he is found guilty under Sec. 324, IPC and is sentenced to the period already undergone by him. In addition, he is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000.00 (two thousand), in default of which, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for eight months. So far as the rest appellants are concerned, they are acquitted of the charges under Sec. 307/149, IPC and, instead, are found guilty for the offence under Sec. 323, IPC and are sentenced to the period already undergone by them. The amount of fine must be deposited in the trial Court within two months of the receipt of this judgment and the amount of fine so realised, shall be payable to Bindeshwari Devi or her successor and with this modification in the order of conviction and sentence, this appeal partly succeeds. Appeal partly allowed.