Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 581 (PAT)

Kari Singh v. State Of Bihar

2003-05-16

ANIL KUMAR SINHA, B.K.JHA

body2003
Judgment BAL KRISHNA JHA, J. 1. The sole appellant Kari Singh has been convicted and sentenced to R.I. for life under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for five years under Section 27 of the Arms Act. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently: 2. On 27.1.97 the informant, Pappu Singh, lodged F.I.R alleging, inter alia, that on the same day while he was at his home and his younger brother, Sanjay Kumar Singh was taking meal in the courtyard of house at about 10.15 a.m. his Tractor Driver, Swami Sharan, came there and informed his younger brother Sanjay Kumar Singh that he was called up by accused appellant Kari Singh. At this Sanjay Kumar Singh washed his hands, came out of origan and went towards west at the darwaza of Jogi Singh where Kari Singh was standing from before. The informant has further alleged that as soon as his younger brother, Sanjay Kumar Singh, arrived at the darwaza of Jogi Singh the accused appellant Kari Singh fired upon him. On hearing the sound of firing he alongwith the other family members rushed there and found Sanjay Kumar Singh lying seriously injured on the ground and he was unconscious. Thereafter he with the help of his uncle Ram Balak Singh (PW 5), Ram Bilash Singh (PW 4) and others removed him to Begusarai hospital for treatment on a jeep where after short while he breathed his last. The witnesses. Ganesh Singh (PW 1), Arbind Singh (PW 2) and Naresh Singh (PW 3) of the P.O. village Ramdiri Ram Nagar, P.S. Matihani, DistrictBegusarai saw the occurrence. The informant has further alleged that his younger brother received firearm injury on his abdomen and left arm above wrist and after committing the crime accused appellant made good escape towards south. 3. On the same day at about 11.45 a.m. S.I. S.K. Jha, Officer- in-Charge of Town Police Station recorded the fardbeyan of Pappu Singh at Sadar Hospital, Begusarai. On the basis of his fardbeyan formal F.I.R (Ext. 7) was drawn up and a case was registered against the accused appellant under Section 302 of the IPC, and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The I.O. Harendra Singh (PW 8) investigated the case which ultimately ended in the submission of the charge-sheet against the accused appellant and his conviction and sentence as indicated above. 4. 7) was drawn up and a case was registered against the accused appellant under Section 302 of the IPC, and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The I.O. Harendra Singh (PW 8) investigated the case which ultimately ended in the submission of the charge-sheet against the accused appellant and his conviction and sentence as indicated above. 4. The accused appellant took a defence that he is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. In fact, the murder of his co-villager Ashok Kumar Singh earlier by Sanjay Kumar Singh, deceased, resulted in his murder by the family members of Ashok Kumar Singh. The defence also examined one witness shiv Kumar, DW 1. 5. In the eventual trial the prosecution examined altogether eight witnesses. Out of them PW 1 Ganesh Singh, PW 2 Arbind Singh, PW 3 Naresh Singh, PW 4 Ram Bilash Singh, PW 5 Ram Balak Singh. PW 6 Pappu Kumar Singh, the informant, are the eye-witnesses to the occurrence. PW 7 is Dr. Prem Chandra Kumar who conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased Sanjay Kumar Singh and PW 8. Harendra Singh, is the LO. of this case. 6. The evidence of PW 6 Pappu Kumar Singh, the informant, is that at the alleged time of occurrence while he was at his home, his brother Sanjay Singh was also at home and was taking meal. His servant Swami Sharan came there and informed Sanjay that he was called up by the accused appellant Kari Singh at the bathan of one Yogi Singh. Sanjay Singh washed his hands and came out from there. After a short while on hearing the sound of firing shot he came out and rushed at the bathaii of Yogi Singh. He found Sanjay Kumar Singh with firearm injuries lying on the ground and the accused appellant Kari Singh fleeing away with pistol towards south. Sanjay Singh was unconscious. Thereafter Sanjay Singh was removed to Begusarai Hospital for treatment by the jeep of his uncle, Ram Balak Singh, PW 5. After sometime Sanjay Singh succumbed to his injuries in the hospital. His further evidence is that Daroga Ji came in the Hospital, recorded his fardbeyan and he put his signature thereon. He has proved his own signature (Ext. 2) and that of Ganesh Singh (PW 1) Ext. 3 on the fardbeyan. After sometime Sanjay Singh succumbed to his injuries in the hospital. His further evidence is that Daroga Ji came in the Hospital, recorded his fardbeyan and he put his signature thereon. He has proved his own signature (Ext. 2) and that of Ganesh Singh (PW 1) Ext. 3 on the fardbeyan. This occurrence was witnessed by Ganesh Singh (PW 1), Naresh Singh (PW 3), Ram Bilash Singh (PW 4), Ram Balak Singh (PW 5), Arbind Singh (PW 2) and many others. In cross-examination he has stated that long long ago there had been some dispute in between his Gotiya Uma Shankar Singh on one side and Ashok Kumar Singh with his family members on the other side. That Ashok Singh later on was murdered. He has denied his knowledge about the involvement of his deceased brother, Sanjay Singh, in the murder of Ashok Singh. He has further stated that on the day of occurrence the deceased Sanjay Singh had taken Purl and Aloo Ki Sabji in his meal. He has further stated that at the bathan of Yogi Singh he had seen his family members, Naresh Singh PW 3, Ram Bilas Singh PW 4, Arbind Singh, PW 2 and Ram Balak Singh PW 5 standing near the deceased Sanjay Singh. He has further deposed that the firing shot hit the abdomen of Sanjay Singh and exited from his back. He further stated that the deceased had no animocity with the accused appellant Kari Singh. The evidence of PW 1 Ganesh Singh, the uncle, PW 2 Arbind Singh and PW 3 Naresh Singh, the uncle of the deceased is that at the alleged time of the occurrence they were sitting at the darwaza of Ram Lakhan Singh Khalifa. Sanjay Singh came out of his house and went at the bathan of Yogi Singh where from before the accused appellant Kari Singh was present. Both of them talked together and after short while they heard the sound of firing. At this they went at the bathan of Yogi Singh and found Sanjay lying injured on the ground with firearm injuries on his stomach and left arm and the blood oozing out. They also noticed the accused appellant Kari Singh fleeing away with pistol in his hand. Their further evidence is that they chased the accused appellant, but due to fear of firearm they came back near Sanjay Singh. They also noticed the accused appellant Kari Singh fleeing away with pistol in his hand. Their further evidence is that they chased the accused appellant, but due to fear of firearm they came back near Sanjay Singh. Thereafter the injured Sanjay Singh was removed to Begusarai hospital for treatment on the jeep of Ram Balak Singh (PW 5), but he died there. The further evidence of PW1 Ganesh Singh is that the accused appellant was on a visiting term of Sanjay and used to call him his sarhu. Sanjay Singh was also accused in murder case. In cross examination PW 1 Ganesh Singh has deposed that at that time about 8 to 10 his family. members including Ram Lakhan Singh Khalifa, Jibu Singh, Ajay, Vijay and Ram Bilash (PW 4) were sitting there. On hearing of sound of firing all of them went at the darwaza of Jogi Singh. He with the help of Naresh Singh, PW 3 wrapped a towel round the injuries of Sanjay Singh. The towel had smeared with blood and the blood had also fallen on the jeep. In cross-examination the evidence of PW 2 Arbind Singh is also that a towel was wrapped around the injuries of Sanjay and the same had smeared with blood and the blood had also fallen on the jeep. In cross-examination PW 3 Naresh Singh has stated that at the relevant hour of the occurrence besides him Ganesh Singh PW 1. Arbind Singh PW 2, Ram Lakhan Singh Khalifa, jibu Singh and many other villagers were sitting at the drawaza and bathan of Jogi Singh was at a distance of ten laggas from there. He has further stated that the blood had also fallen on the ground. On the alleged date and time PW 4 Ram Bilash Singh was sitting at the darwaza of Ram Balak Singh PW 5 the uncle of the deceased Sanjay. Their evidence is that on hearing the sound of firing they went at the darwaza of Jogi Singh and found Sanjay lying injured with firearm injury on the ground- His body was found smeared with blood. They saw the accused appellant Kari Singh fleeing away towards south with pistol in his hand. He was chased but he made good escape towards south with a pistol in his hand. They saw the accused appellant Kari Singh fleeing away towards south with pistol in his hand. He was chased but he made good escape towards south with a pistol in his hand. Thereafter a towel was wrapped round the injured portion of Sanjay Singh and he was removed to Sadar Hospital Begusarai for treatment on a jeep but he died there. The further evidence of PW 5 Ram Balak Singh is that in the hospital inquest report was prepared and he put his signature thereon (Ext. 1). In cross- examination PW 4 Ram Bilash Singh has stated that in between the darwaza of Ram Balak Singh PW 5 and Jogi Singh there is darwaza of Lakhan Singh. At the alleged time about 25 to 50 co-villagers including Naresh PW 3, Ganesh PW 1, Arbind Singh PW 2 and others were present at the darwaza of Jogi Singh. He has further stated that at that time the family members of Jogi Singh namely, Jogi Singh, his brother, Mantun Singh, Puntun Singh and his wife were present in the house. In cross- examination PW 5 Ram Balak Singh deposed that one month before the occurrence his co-villager Ashok Singh was murdered in which he was one of the witnesses but he had denied his knowledge about the submission of the charge-sheet in that case against the deceased Sanjay. 7. PW 7 is Dr. Prem Chandra Kumar. His evidence is that on 27.1.97 while he was posted as CAS. at Begusarai Sadar Hospital on the same day at about 12.50 p.m. he conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased Sanjay Kumar Singh and found the following ante mortem injuries on his body : 1. One lacerated inverted charred margin of about 1/3" diameter with surrounding charring of the skin of about 3" diameter, a lacerated perforated wound situated over the right hypochondrium 2" below the coastal margin and 3" away from the middle line. On disection he found abdominal wall lacerated, the peritoneal cavity fully filled with clotted blood, stomach walls, mysentry, grater omentum and small intestine perforated, the large branch of superior mysentries artery lacerated. The wound No. 1 was cornmunicating exterior through injury No. 2. 2. One everted margin of lacerated wound of the size of about 3/4" diameter situated on the left side of the back 2" above illiack crest and 3" from middle line. 3. The wound No. 1 was cornmunicating exterior through injury No. 2. 2. One everted margin of lacerated wound of the size of about 3/4" diameter situated on the left side of the back 2" above illiack crest and 3" from middle line. 3. One inverted lacerated wound (no blackening of the margin) situated over the latteral side of the middle of the left forearm. On further disection he found bullet recovered from the underneath skin on medial side of the middle of the left forearm, soft tissue lacerated and the bone intact. He has further stated that on twisting the forearm to the back the levell of injury No. 2 and 3 was the same and suggested that the same recovered bullet caused the above 3 (three) injuries. In his opinion the death was caused by profussed internal haemorrhage from injury No. 1 leading to hypovolumic shock and death. The weapon used was fire arm from (very close range) blank range. According to him the time elapsed since death was within six hours at the time of post mortem examination. He found rigour mortis absent and stomach filled with undigested food- (boiled rice detected). He proved the post mortem examination report (Ex. 4). In cross-examination his evidence is that in this case the firing was from a distance of within 3. He has further stated that all the injuries found in this case were possible by one fire shot from the close range. 8. The evidence of PW 8, Harendra Singh, the I.O. of this case, is that on 27.1.97 while he was posted as O.C. of Matihani Police Station he received telephonic information that a person of village Ramdiri Tola Ramnagar was lying injured on the ground with firearm injuries on his person. He made Station Diary Entry No. 412 dated 27.1.97 and proceeded for the P.O village alongwith the police party. When he reached in village Ramdiri Tola Ram Nagar he learnt about the removal of the injured Sanjay Kumar Singh to the Begusarai Hospital for treatment and also the name of the accused appellant Kari Singh as his assailant. The house of the accused appellant Kari Singh was searched. He was found absconding and nothing incriminating article was recovered from his house. Thereafter he went to Begusarai Hospital and came to know about the death of Sanjay Kumar Singh. The house of the accused appellant Kari Singh was searched. He was found absconding and nothing incriminating article was recovered from his house. Thereafter he went to Begusarai Hospital and came to know about the death of Sanjay Kumar Singh. He also came to know that the fardbeyan, Ext. 6, and inquest report, Ext. 5, had been prepared by the town police. He also proved the formal F.I.R. Ext. 7. On receipt of the inquest report and fardbeyan a case bearing Matihani P.S. Case No. 7/97 was registered and he switched over to the investigation. On the same day on 3.30 p.m. he again visited the P.O., recorded further statement of the informant and seized the blood stained earth. He also recorded the statements of the witnesses, namely. Rabindra Singh, Ram Balak Singh (PW 5), Ram Bilash Singh (PW 4), Arbind Singh (PW 2), Naresh Singh (PW 3) and Swami Sharan Tanti, and arrested the accused appellant Kari Singh on 22.2.97. On completion of the investigation he charger-sheeted the accused appellant for trial. In cross- examination his attention was drawn to the statements of the witnesses recorded by him during investigation under Section 161 Cr PC, but nothing substantial contradiction appeared in his evidence. On the other hand, the defence has also examined one witness Shiv Kumar, DW 1, who proved the school transfer certificate issued in the name of Jitendra Kumar son of Janardan Singh, Ext. A. His date of birth has been shown as 15.12.80. The accused appellant is also son of Janardan Prasad Singh and this certificate (Ext. A) was brought on the record to show his alias name as Jitendra Kumar and on the date of the occurrence he was minor. The trial Court rightly rejected this defence plea on the ground that prior to 6.1.99 the accused appellant had never pleaded that Kari Singh and Jitendra Singh are the same and one person. The defence also brought on the record the certified copy of the charge-sheet of the murder case of Ashok Kumar Singh bearing C.R. Case No. 42/97 (Ext. B). The Ext. B reveals that the complicity of the accused appellant Kari Singh and the deceased Sanjay Kumar Singh was found during the supervision in the murder of Ashok Kumar Singh but this documentary evidence does not in any way affect the present case. 9. B). The Ext. B reveals that the complicity of the accused appellant Kari Singh and the deceased Sanjay Kumar Singh was found during the supervision in the murder of Ashok Kumar Singh but this documentary evidence does not in any way affect the present case. 9. On close examination of the above discussed evidence I find that on 27.1.97, while Sanjay Kumar Singh the younger brother of the informant Pappu Kumar Singh was taking meal in the courtyard of his home at about 10.15 a.m. his tractor driver Swami Sharan came and informed him that he was called up by the accused appellant Kari Singh. Then Sanjay Kumar Singh washed his hands, came out of angan and went towards west at the darwaza of Jogi Singh where Kari Singh was waiting him from before. They talked togethe for a. short time and thereafter the accused appellant Kari Singh fired a shot at Sanjay Kumar Singh, He sustained firearm injury on his stomach and left arm and he fell down injured on the ground and became unconscious. On hearing the sound 6f firing the informant. Pappu Kumar Singh.PW 6 and other witnesses Ganesh Singh, PW 1, Arbind Singh, PW 2, Naresh Singh, PW 3, Ram Bilas Singh, PW 4 and Ram Balak Singh, PW 5, rushed at the darwaza of Jogi Singh and found that Sanjay Kumar Singh was lying injured on the ground and the accused appellant Kari Singh was fleeing away towards south with a pistol in his hand. He was chased to a short distance but due to fear of firearm the chasers left him escaped from there. Thereafter on the same day i.e. 27.1.97, the injured Sanjay Kumar Singh was removed to Begusari Hospital for treatment on the jeep of Ram Balak, PW 5 but he died there. The fardbeyan of the informant Pappu Kumar Singh, PW 6, was recorded at 11.45 p.m. in the hospital. PW 7 Dr. Prem Chandra Kumar conducted the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased on the same day at 12.50 p.m. and affirmed his death caused by firearm injuries. As per the prosecution version the occurrence happened on 27.1.97 at 10.15 a.m. and the post mortem examination was held at 12.50 p.m.. So, his death was found within three hours. Prem Chandra Kumar conducted the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased on the same day at 12.50 p.m. and affirmed his death caused by firearm injuries. As per the prosecution version the occurrence happened on 27.1.97 at 10.15 a.m. and the post mortem examination was held at 12.50 p.m.. So, his death was found within three hours. Thus, time elapsed in between the death and the post mortem examination held was within three hours and according to the doctor it was six hours. Thus, the medical evidence is in consonance with the prosecution case. On visit of the place of the occurrence the I.O. Harendra Singh PW 8 seized blood stained earth. All the witnesses have been cross- examined at length but nothing material could be elicited from their mouth to discredit their testimony and disbelieve the prosecution case. 10. Learned counsel for the appellant (Amicus Cuirae) contended that in this case the prosecution has not disclosed any motive for committing the alleged crime which makes the prosecution case doubtful and so the accused appellant is entitled to benefit of doubt. On the other hand, the learned advocate. for the informant vehemently objected his contention and submitted that in a case of murder motive is not always necessary to be disclosed by the prosecution and its non-descloser will not affect the case. He has placed his reliance on the case of Rajinder Kumar V/s. State of Punjab, reported in AIR 1966 SC 1323, wherein in has been held that: "The motive behind a crime (in this case one punishable under Section 302, Indian Penal Code) is a relevant fact of which evidence can be given. The absence of a motive is also a circumstance which is relevant for assessing the evidence. The circumstances which prove the guilt of the accused are, however, not weakened at all by this fact that the motive has not been established. It often happens that only the culprit himself knows what moved him to a certain course of action." 11. The learned counsel for the appellant further contended that as per the evidence of the informant, Pappu Kumar Singh, his younger brother, Sanjay Kumar Singh had taken Puri and Aloo Ki Sabji but on the alleged date of the occurrence PW 7, Dr. Prem Chandra Kumar, found his stomach filled with undigested food (boiled rice detected). The learned counsel for the appellant further contended that as per the evidence of the informant, Pappu Kumar Singh, his younger brother, Sanjay Kumar Singh had taken Puri and Aloo Ki Sabji but on the alleged date of the occurrence PW 7, Dr. Prem Chandra Kumar, found his stomach filled with undigested food (boiled rice detected). There is no evidence that the deceased Sanjay Kumar Singh had taken boiled rice on the alleged date of the occurrence. The medical evidence is not consistent with the ocular evidence. So, the conviction of the accused appellant cannot be sustained. On the other hand the learned counsel for the informant submitted that the medical evidence is consistent with the occular evidence that Sanjay Kumar Singh died of firearm injuries caused on his person. The finding of the doctor that his stomach was filled with undigested food (boiled rice detected) will not affect the core of the prosecution case regarding the death of Sanjay Kumar Singh by firearm injuries. In this context he place his reliance on the case of Sardul Singh V/s. State of Punjab, reported in Cr LJ 1994, 627 wherein it has been held that : "Murder.Inconsistency between ocular and medical evidenceDispute over propertyOld lady, staying with one son, was attacked by another son Daughter-in-law trying to save her. also received injuries-Injuries, not self inflictedEvidence of eye-witnesses that food was taken immediately before occurrenceEvidence of witnesses cannot be disbelieved on basis of medical evidence regarding presence of semidigested food in her stomachTheir evidence otherwise credibleConviction proper." Learned counsel for the informant again submitted that the accused appellant Kari Singh is a criminal and has got criminal antecedent. On the Shradh function of the deceased Sanjay Kumar Singh on 30.6.97, this accused appellant committed the murder of Dhenajay Singh, the own brother of Sanjay Kumar Singh in which he was charge-sheeted for trial. 12 Thus, on the basis of the evidence, circumstances discussed above, I find no scope to suspect the evidence of eye-witnesses and disbelieve the case of the prosecution. The prosecution has established the charges against the accused appellant beyond all reasonable doubts and the Judgment of conviction of the Court below requires no interference by this Court. 13. In the result, this appeal fails and is dismissed. The conviction and sentence passed by the trial Judge against the sole appellant are confirmed. The prosecution has established the charges against the accused appellant beyond all reasonable doubts and the Judgment of conviction of the Court below requires no interference by this Court. 13. In the result, this appeal fails and is dismissed. The conviction and sentence passed by the trial Judge against the sole appellant are confirmed. The accuse appellant Kari Singh is in custody. So, he will serve out the remaining period of sentence imposed upon him. Learned counsel Mr. Tripathy (Amicus Curiae) will get fee from P.H.C.C. of Legal Aid and Advice.