Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 382 (PAT)

Chandrika Singh v. State Of Bihar

2002-03-21

B.N.P.SINGH

body2002
Judgment B.N.P.Singh, J. 1. The prosecution went for trial of the appellants and others with accusation that on 22nd July 1985, while. Brahmdeo Das (PW 4) was ploughing land of Manoj Kumar for tree planting paddy seedings in the field, appellants came there, and on exhortation of Subh Narain Singh, while Bidya Nand Singh dealt blows with Bhala on his neck, Chandrika Singh dealt blows with Bhala on his abdomen which was followed by indiscriminate assault by Subh Narain Singh, Shankar Sah, Rup Narain Singh and Lakshmi Giri. After the police was set in motion on these accusations appearing in the fard beyan of Brahmdeo Das which was recorded at 8.15 PM on 22nd July 1985 in the Sadar Hospital, Sitamarhi investigation commenced, in course of which police officer recorded statement of witnesses u/s 161 of the Cr. PC. visited the place of occurrence, secured injury report from the hospital and on conclusion of investigation laid charge sheet before the court. It seems that before the trial commenced, Rup Narain Singh died and hence proceeding was dropped against him and it is how that the trial commenced only against five persons including the two appellants. In the eventual trial, the State examined altogether 8 witnesses which include the injured, Brahmdeo Das, his master Manoj Kumar, the Doctor who attended the injured, the police officer and host of other witnesses who claimed themselves to be conversant with the incident. 2. Persisting land dispute between the parties was taken to be a ground by the appellants for their alleged false implication. The defence also brought on record number of documents ostensibly to suggest land dispute between the parties and the trial court while evaluating evidences of PWs 1, 2, 4 and 5 and also the positive finding recorded by the Doctor, though did not find the appellants guilty of the charges u/s 307 of the IPC, recorded verdict of guilt against Bidya Nand Singh u/s 326 of the IPC and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for a term of 3 years. As for Chandrika Singh, he suffered conviction u/s 324 of IPC and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for a term of one year. Both the appellants also suffered conviction u/s 148 of the IPC and were sentenced to suffer R.I. for a term of one year. As for Chandrika Singh, he suffered conviction u/s 324 of IPC and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for a term of one year. Both the appellants also suffered conviction u/s 148 of the IPC and were sentenced to suffer R.I. for a term of one year. Though, Subh Narain Singh, Lakshmi Giri and Shankar Sah too suffered conviction u/s 323 and 147 of the IPC, regard being had to the nature of accusation attributed to them and also attending circumstances of the case they were released on admonition as enjoined u/s 3 of the Probation of the Offenders Act, 1958. Among those who suffered conviction, only the appellants have challenged the finding recorded by the trial court. 3. Volume of arguments were urged at the Bar on behalf of the appellants to challenge the propriety of finding recorded by the trial court on the premises that though Riga was at insignificant distance of about 2 to 3 kms from Shiv Nagar where the place of occurrence situates, the injured did not take recourse to public authority at Riga and preferred to negotiate a longer distance at Sitamarhi to get himself examined by the Doctor. Belated prosecution was also taken to be a ground to assail the bonafide of the prosecution case. The contentions are raised that Chandeshwar Thakur, Darogi Das and Sukeshwar Das whose names very much appear in the fard beyan of the injured as eye witness, were not examined by the State though Chandeshwar Thakur was shown to have carried the injured to the hospital and as for Lagan Das, it is urged that he did not claim to have carried the injured to the hospital, as he left his company in midway. While commenting on the credibility of the witnesses who projected themselves to be ocular witnesses to the incident, it is urged that taking narrations made by PW 1 and PW 4 to be true, as Navin Kumar and Nandu Sah rushed to the place of occurrence only after the alarms were raised the possibility of there being ocular witnesses was extremely remote. About credibility of the witnesses, it is urged that PW 1 was related to PW 2 and that apart the later had also ruled out infliction of injury on Brahmdeo Das by Chandrika Singh. PW 1, it is urged was a chance witness and hence he did not deserve credence. About credibility of the witnesses, it is urged that PW 1 was related to PW 2 and that apart the later had also ruled out infliction of injury on Brahmdeo Das by Chandrika Singh. PW 1, it is urged was a chance witness and hence he did not deserve credence. The positive finding recorded by the Doctor who examined Brahmdeo Das was also criticised on the anvil that while at first instance, injury caused by Chandrika Singh on abdomen of the injured was considered to be simple, eventually by correction slip, the finding was reversed by the Doctor and injury caused by Bidya Nand Singh on neck was considered to be grievous which did not sound well, as even the injury on the neck of the injured did not fall within the ambit of Section 320 of the IPC. There being no marks of violence on the place of occurrence, or there being any incriminating object, was also taken to be a ground to suspect the bonafide of the prosecution case, and last argument canvassed on behalf of the appellants was that as the appellants suffered ordeal of protracted prosecution for about 17 years, in case finding of guilt recorded by the court below was endorsed by this Court, this mitigating circumstances would deserve consideration for imposition of sentence on them. The learned counsel appearing for the State would endorse the finding recorded by the court below. The narrations made by Nandu Sah PW 1, Lagan Sah, PW 2 and Navin Kumar, PW 5 were in tune with early version of prosecution. Appellant Bidya Nand Singh dealt blows with Bhala on the neck of Brahmdeo Das which was followed by Chandrika Singh who dealt blows with said weapon, on the abdomen of injured. The Doctor too had recorded positive finding, as he noticed penetrating wound on both parts of the injured. However, this fact cannot be lost sight of that the first finding recorded by the Doctor was reversed subsequently by a correction slip and that too on his own motion by which injury caused by Bidya Nand Singh was considered to be grievous due to rupture of vessels. However, this fact cannot be lost sight of that the first finding recorded by the Doctor was reversed subsequently by a correction slip and that too on his own motion by which injury caused by Bidya Nand Singh was considered to be grievous due to rupture of vessels. It is admitted that the injured was not subjected to X-ray examination nor there was any finding of Radiologist on the record and the finding recorded by the Doctor about the injury to be grievous appear to be simply based on his estimation. 4. The non examination of those who were suggested to have flocked to the place of occurrence, those who carried the injured to the hospital did not constitute an infirmity in prosecution case for the reason that those examined at trial had led good and positive evidence and that too free from blemishes. There being no presence of blood on the place of occurrence was a matter of petty details which did not be the real issue nor could affect the broad features of the prosecution case. Apart from ocular evidence there was finding of the Doctor too who noticed corresponding injuries on the person of the injured. The incident took place at 10 AM on 22.7.1985 and fard beyan of the injured was recorded only at 8.15 hours on the same day after the injured negotiated distance of about 6 Kms. from Shiv Nagar and in this backdrop the prosecution cannot be saddled with criticism of launching belated prosecution. Though, volume of the documents were placed on behalf of the appellants to suggest land dispute between the parties, the trial court had not given due credence to them for consideration of the issue pending before it and on the premises stated above while conviction of Bidya Nand Singh is converted u/s 324 of the IPC, the finding recorded against Chandrika Singh is upheld. The finding of guilt recorded by trial court against the appellants u/s 148 of the IPC also did not require interference in view of weapons shown to have been used by them. However, regard being had to the fact that the appellants suffered ordeal of protracted prosecution for about 17 years and there being some sort of land dispute between the parties, both the appellants are sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. However, regard being had to the fact that the appellants suffered ordeal of protracted prosecution for about 17 years and there being some sort of land dispute between the parties, both the appellants are sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 2500/- each and to suffer R.I. for a term of 8 months, in default thereof, and with this modification in sentence this appeal is dismissed. The fine to be deposited with the trial court within two months from the date of receipt/production of the order. Half of the fine would be payable to the injured or his heir if the former is not alive.