Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 1043 (PAT)

Madho Dubey v. State Of Bihar

2007-06-01

SYED MD.MAHFOOZ ALAM

body2007
Judgment 1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 15.11.2006 passed in Sessions Trial No. 904 of 2004 by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Motihari, whereby he has been pleased to reject the petition filed on behalf of the petitioners under sec. 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for discharging them from trial. 2. It has been submitted by the learned Advocate of the petitioners that there is no material in the entire case diary that the deceased had died due to taking poisonous PEPSI, on the other hand, there is sufficient material in the case diary to come to the conclusion that the deceased had died due to drinking of wine in excess quantity. In support of his argument, learned Advocate of the petitioners has placed reliance upon the post mortem report as well as on the report of Forensic Science Laboratory (Annexure-4). 3. It has been submitted by the learned Advocate of the informant that there is suspicion that the deceased was offered poisonous PEPSI and due to drinking of poisonous PEPSI the deceased might have died. 4. From perusal of the case diary, it appears that a U.D. case was instituted on the basis of the statement of own brother of deceased Kameshwar Thakur. In the said statement, Mohan Thakur, the brother of the deceased has stated that the deceased was in the habit of drinking wine and it appears that due to excess drinking of wine he has died. On the basis of that statement a U.D. case was instituted and the post mortem of deceased Kameshwar Thakur was done. In the post mortem the doctor did not find any mark of violence on the dead body of the deceased and, as such, viscera was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory. It appears that the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory was received and according to the said report no substance of poisonous material was found in the viscera, rather, intoxicating material was found in viscera. 5. All these facts establish that the deceased might have died due to excess drinking of wine. There is no other reliable evidence in the case diary except the suspicion that the PEPSI which was offered to the deceased might have contained poisonous material. 5. All these facts establish that the deceased might have died due to excess drinking of wine. There is no other reliable evidence in the case diary except the suspicion that the PEPSI which was offered to the deceased might have contained poisonous material. But, in view of the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory it cannot be said that the PEPSI, which was offered to the deceased, was containing poisonous material due to taking of which the deceased might have died. 6. Under the circumstances, I am of the view that there is no sufficient material in the case diary to frame charge against the petitioners. In such view of the matter, this application is hereby allowed and the impugned order dated 15.11.2006 passed in Sessions Trial No. 904 of 2004 by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Motihari, is hereby set aside and the petitioners are ordered to be discharged from facing trial in Sessions Trial No. 904 of 2004. 7. In the result, this application is allowed.