Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 737 (PAT)

Shyam Nath Sah v. State Of Bihar

2007-04-12

INDU PRABHA SINGH

body2007
Judgment I.P.Singh, J. 1. The appellant has been convicted under sec. 326 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorours imprisonment for three years. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant, Sachidanand Singh got his land in village Laxmipur and used to produce wheat etc. It has been alleged that Shyam Nath Sah, Ram Singar Singh and Ramji San also lived in the same village. Shyamnath Sah had a grocery shop. So he purchased one Quintal of wheat from Sachidanand Singh on credit for selling it in his shop. On 17.7.1985 at about 6 P.M. Sachidanand Singh (informant) went to Bakhari Chatti and called Shyam Nath Sah on the road and demanded Rs. 150 price of one quintal of wheat which he sold to him on credit. There Ramji Sah, Hajari Sah and Ram Singar Singh were also present. On demand of the price of wheat Shyam Nath Sah did not pay the price. So an altercation took place in between them. All the four accused persons began to hurle abuses to the informant. The informant protested. At this Hazari Sah and Ramji Sah caught hold of Sachidanand Singh and they began to assault him with fists and slaps. Hazari Sah also ordered to assault him. Then Shyam Nath Sah went to his shop which was on the other side of the road and brought farsa and assaulted Sachidnand Singh on his head. Ram Singar Singh also assaulted. Having sustained injuries the informant fell down and raised alarm. After that Ram Singar Singh took away Rs. 250/- from his pocket. In the meantime Deonath Singh, Shanker Singh, Mulhai Mishra, Baleshwar Choudhary assembled there and saved the life of the informant. After the occurrence they also brought him to Mahua Hospital and his Fardbeyan was recorded. On the basis of the aforesaid Fardbeyan a formal F.I.R. was drawn up. The police after completing the evidence submitted charge sheet. The case was committed to the court of session in which the appellant has been convicted in the manner indicated above. 3. The appellant pleaded not guilty and has stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case at the instance of his enemies. 4. The prosecution in order to prove its case has examined altogether seven witnesses. P.W. 1 is Deonath Singh. P.W. 2 Shiva Shanker Singh. 3. The appellant pleaded not guilty and has stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case at the instance of his enemies. 4. The prosecution in order to prove its case has examined altogether seven witnesses. P.W. 1 is Deonath Singh. P.W. 2 Shiva Shanker Singh. P.W. 3 Sachinand Nand Singh is the informant himself. P.W. 4 Shambhunath Choudhary and P.W. 6 Lagandeo Singh are Advocate Clerks They have only proved documents of prosecution. P.W. 5 is Dr. Ram Ashish Singh who examined the injured informant. P.W. 7 is Jainath Singh the then Officer Incharge of Mahua Police Station. 5. P.W. 3, the informant, Sachidanand Singh has fully supported the case of the prosecution. He has stated that on 17.7.1985 at about 6 P.M. he went to Bakhari Chatti from his house to realize the price of one quintal of wheat from Shyam Nath Sah. He called Shyamnath Sah and demanded Rs. 119/- price of the wheat. But he did not pay the price of the wheat and began to hurle abuses. He has further stated that he also called Hajari Sah, Ramji Sah and Ram Singar Singh and when the informant protested and again demanded his money as he had to pay wages of the labourers. Then at the instigation of Hazari Sah, Ramji Sah and Hazari Sah caught hold of the informant. They assaulted him with fists and slaps and in the meantime Shyam Nath Sah went to his shop which was on the southern side of the road and brought a Farsa from his shop. He gave three blows on his head. He has further stated that after sustaining injuries of Farsa blow he fell down. Thereafter he was brought to Mahua Hospital for his treatment where his Fardbeyan was recorded. 6. P.Ws. 1 and 2 have also supported the version of the informant. They have stated that there was an altercation in between Shyamnath Sah and the informant on payment of price of wheat on (sic) Shyam Nath Sah went to his shop and brought a Farsa and assaulted the informant. He after sustaining injury fell down. 7. P.W. 7 is the Investigating Officer of this case. He has proved the Fardbeyan of the informant which was scribed by A.S.I. N.P. Singh and also the formal F.I.R. He has stated that he started the investigation on 18.7.1985. He after sustaining injury fell down. 7. P.W. 7 is the Investigating Officer of this case. He has proved the Fardbeyan of the informant which was scribed by A.S.I. N.P. Singh and also the formal F.I.R. He has stated that he started the investigation on 18.7.1985. He visited the place of occurrence and has given the vivid description of the same. 8. P.W. 5 is Doctor Ram Ashish Singh who has examined the injured informant on 17.7.1985 and found the following injuries on his person:- 9. One incised wound of 1" x 1/2" x 1/ 2" cutting the scalp as well as part of vault of skull bone with bleeding over the right forehead. Incised would 1 1/2" x 13" x 1/3" over the right upper eye brow with cutting the supra arbitai artry and nerve with bleeding. Incised wound of 1" x 1/3" x 1/3" over the middle of the right side of the thumb. 10. All the injuries were caused by sharp cutting weapon like Farsa and according to the Doctor all the injuries we on the vital parts of the body and injury nos. 1 and 2 were dangerous to life. 11. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned court below has not appreciated that the appellant also got injured in the occurrence. As such the prosecution has suppressed this fact and has not come with clean hand and a false story has been built up to implicate the appellant other persons in this case. It has been submitted that the informant is a muscle man of his locality whereas the appellant has got no criminal antecedent. 12. From the records it appears that the defence has not examined any witness rather it has filed several documents to show that there are criminal cases pending against the informant. Fardbeyan has also been filed to show that there was a case for occurrence. However, the counter case was found improbable and accused were acquitted in that case. 13. Learned court below after discussion all aspects of the case in detail came to the conclusion and rightly found the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and accordingly convicted him. I do not find any reason to interfere with the conviction of the appellant. 14. 13. Learned court below after discussion all aspects of the case in detail came to the conclusion and rightly found the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and accordingly convicted him. I do not find any reason to interfere with the conviction of the appellant. 14. Coming to the question of the sentence learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the occurrence took place 21 years back and the appellant has been sufficiently punished and harassed during this prolonged litigation. He has also remained in jail for some time. As such some lenient view may be taken while awarding sentence to the appellant. 15. Considering the submission of the learned counsel I am of the view that it will be expedient in the interest of justice if the sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period he has already undergone in jail with a fine of Rs. 500/- to be deposited by him within a period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. In default of payment of fine he shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. 16. With the aforesaid modification in the sentence this appeal is dismissed.