Chandrika Singh and Others vs The State of Bihar

Anjana Prakash, J.—The Appellants have been convicted for the offence u/s 307/149 Indian Penal Code and sentence to rigorous imprisonment for seven years whereas Appellant No. 2 has further been convicted u/s 326 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years and Appellant No. 4 to 5 have been convicted u/s 323 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for nine months by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Begusarai, by a Judgment and order of conviction dated 22.7.1999 in Sessions Trial No. 475 of 1991. The case of the Prosecution according to the Informant Bisundeo Prasad Singh is that on 7.7.1991 at about 5.00 P.M. while he was sitting at his house, he saw his brother, Appellant Chandrika Singh, his nephew Binod Singh, Nand Kishore Singh and Ratan Singh came there and started dismantling the bricks from his house which had fallen in his share. When he started to protest along with the sons, Appellant Chandrika Singh gave orders to assault, upon which Appellant Binod Kumar Singh gave a spade blow on the hand of Ranjit Singh and the Informant. The Appellant Pramod Kumar Singh inflicted a Bhala blow on the head of Sunil Kumar Singh. Appellant Chandrika Singh assaulted on the chest of the Informant with Khanti whereas Ratan Singh threw brickbats on Ranjit Singh and Nand Kishore Singh gave repeated lathi blows on the Informant and his son which caused serious injuries on their persons.

The defence of the accused was a false implication on account of earlier land dispute.

During Trial, the Prosecution examined eight witnesses in support of their case. PW-5 Ramashish Singh and PW-3 Jagdip Singh have not supported the case of the Prosecution. PW-1 Sunil Kumar Singh, PW-2 Ranjit Singh and PW-4 Bisundeo Pd. Singh are the Informant and his sons who were examined as eye witnesses. They all stated consistently that while the Informant was sitting at the door, the accused persons came and started dismantling the bricks of the house which was protested by them. All these accused persons having been armed, variously assaulted them on vital portion of the body on account of which they were seriously injured.

Dr. Shiv Kumari found three injuries on the person of Bishundeo Singh, four injuries on the person of Ranjit Kumar and five injuries on the person of Sushil Kumar. Apart from one injury on the person of injured Ranjit Kumar, the rest of the injuries were opined to be simple in nature.

PW-7 Bharat Pandey is the Investigating Officer of the case who submitted charge sheet after due investigation.

From the evidence of the eye witnesses, it is evident that the Informant Bisundeo Prasad Singh and Appellant Chandrika Singh are full brothers whereas the rest of the Appellants are his nephews. Admittedly, the occurrence had taken place on account of allotment of share which was being claimed by both the parties. The manner in which the occurrence took place and nature of injuries, belies the Prosecution case, so far as the intent of the accused is concerned. In the opinion of the Court, no offence u/s 307 Indian Penal Code is made out in the facts of the case.

Hence, the Appellants are acquitted of charge u/s 307 Indian Penal Code. As for the conviction of Appellant Binod Kumar Singh u/s 326 Indian Penal Code that even though, the Doctor has stated that the injury was serious in nature but, I find that it was skin deep which would not fall within the category of a grievous injury. Hence, his conviction also u/s 326 Indian Penal Code is set aside.

Since the witnesses are consistent on the genesis and manner of occurrence which is further fully corroborated by the medical evidence, they are convicted u/s 323/149 Indian Penal Code. However, their sentence is reduced to one already undergone by them during Trial. In the result, the Appeal is dismissed with the aforesaid modification.