Mahanth Prasad Singh and Others vs State of Bihar

This Judnment will dispose of Criminal Appeal Nos. 317, 318 of 1983 and Criminal Appeal Nos. 733-734 of 1980 as they arise out of a common judgment and relate to a common occurrence.

On 4th March, 1969 at about 8 A.M. at village Ankuri, within the jurisdiction of police station Paliganj, Chandradhari Singh, deceased, alongwith his nephew Subas Singh, P.W. 6, was going towards Mahwalipur Bazar. When they reached the field, at a distance of about 100 yards from the house of Nunchat Kahar, they were surrounded by a mob, armed with gandassas, farsas, bhallas and sticks. The mob assaulted Chandradhari Singh, as a result of which he fell down and ultimately succumbed to his injuries. One of the accused, out of that mob, Paramhans Singh also gave a bhalla blow to P.W. 6, Subas Singh, causing him a bleeding injury. Subas Singh PW6, rushed to the Police Station, Paliganj and lodged the First information Report Ext. 4, against the accused persons. The First Information Report was drawn up by ASI Nand Kishore Pandey, P.W. 13. After completion of the investigation, 17 accused persons were sent up for trial. They were all found guilty of offences under Sections 302/149 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. They were also convicted for the offence under Sections 302/34 IPC but no separate sentence of imprisonment was passed against them on that count. All the accused were also found guilty u/s 118 IPC and sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment. Some of the accused were found guilty of other offences and convicted and sentenced accordingly. However, all the substantive sentences of imprisonment were directed to run concurrently. The appeal filed by the convicts against their conviction and sentence was dismissed by the High Court vide judgment dated 10.1.1980. By special leave they have filed these four appeals in this Court.

We have heard Mr. U.R. Lalit, learned senior counsel appearing for five of the Appellants in Criminal Appeal Nos. 733-734 of 1980. One of the Appellants, who had filed the appeal alongwith these five Appellants namely, Shyam Bihari Singh, is reported to have died during the pendency of the appeal in this Court. Mr. Pandey has appeared on behalf of six Appellants, who had filed the appeals alongwith these six Appellants, namely, Janardan Prasad Singh, Krishna Prasad Singh, Dwarika Prasad Singh and Sita Saran Singh are reported to have died during the pendency of the appeals in this Court. Ram Babu, who had also been convicted and sentenced by the trial Court and who had preferred an appeal in the High Court died during the pendency of the appeal in the High Court. Thus, now we have eleven Appellants before us in these appeals.

There are four eye witnesses in the case i.e. P.W. 3, P.W. 4, P.W. 6 and P.W. 9. Out of these eye witnesses, P.W. 6 Subhash, nephew of the deceased, is also an injured witness who had lodged the First Information Report. The occurrence, according to the prosecution case took place at about 8.00 A.M. The First Information Report was promptly lodged at police station at a distance of about 7 miles at about 10.45 A.M. In the First Information Report, the names of all the 17 accused have been mentioned. The manner in which the occurrence took place has also been specifically detailed. Both the trial Court and the High Court found that the eye witness account given by all the four eye witnesses in general and by P.W. 6, the Injured eye witness in particular, has received ample corroboration not only from the prompt First Information Report but also from the medical evidence. We have perused the evidence of some of the eye witnesses, with the assistance of learned Counsel for the Appellants, and find that the appreciation of evidence both by the trial Court and by the High Court suffers from no error whatsoever. The manner in which the assault was made and the injuries inflicted, which according to Dr. Ramesh Chandra Sinha, PW. 1, were fourteen in number on the deceased, have clearly established the case against the Appellants and connected them with the crime. We are unable to agree with Mr. Lalit. learned senior counsel, that the offence for which the Appellants could have been convicted in the facts and circumstances of the case, would fall u/s 326 IPC or Section 304 Part-II IPC. Looking to the nature of the injuries caused by the Appellants who had all come together and attacked an unarmed Chandradhari Singh mercilessly clearly shows that the common object with which the Appellants had collected was to commit the murder of decesed Chandradhari Singh and the offence, therefore, would squarely fall u/s 302/149 IPC.

Mr. Pandey drew our attention to the defence evidence to impress that Paramhans Singh was suffering from T.B. and, therefore, his participation in the assault could not have been possible, we cannot agree. The High Court has dealt with the evidence of all the 14 defence witnesses and has considered the medical evidence relating to the illness of Paramhans Singh. We are in agreement with the view of the High Court that the evidence led by the defence in respect of the illness of Paramhans Singh does not in any way belie the ocular testimony of P.W. 6. who has categorically deposed that he had received the injury at the hand of Paramhans Singh. The evidence of defence witnesses regarding the illness of Paramhans Singh cannot be interpreted to mean that Paramhans Singh suffered from such a disability on the date of the occurrence that he could not have participated in the occurrence at all.

We find that the eye witness account is cogent, reliable and trustworthy. It has received ample corroboration from the other material on the record. Both the Courts rightly found the Appellants guilty of the various offences with which they were charged. We are in agreement with the view taken by the High Court. We do not find any merit in these appeals. The same are hereby dismissed.

The Appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds shall stand cancelled and they shall be taken into custody to undergo the remaining part of their sentence.