Ram Singh and Others vs State of Bihar

Anjana Prakash, J.—Pursuant to the order dated 19.12.2013 the matter has been listed for further hearing. Learned counsel for the appellants produces the evidence of the witnesses in Court for its convenience.

Appellants are convicted u/s 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years by the 4th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Saran, Chapra by judgment dated 27.11.1995.

The case of the informant is that on 24.07.1979 while he along with his father Chandarma Singh and elder brother Jamadar Singh were sitting at the door, at about 2.00 p.m., all of a sudden appellants came to his house variously armed and abused his father to get the partition of the land done. Thereafter, they started to assault them on account of which they were injured.

The defence of the appellants is that no such occurrence had taken place and, in fact, false case with fake medical certificates was postured upon for reasons of land dispute.

During trial, the prosecution examined seven witnesses. PW-1 Jamadar Singh is the elder brother of the informant and injured. He stated about the earlier dispute with regard to partition and while he was sitting at his door along with father of the informant, the accused persons variously armed, came and assaulted them. He further stated that he was taken to the hospital where he was treated.

PW-2 Chandrama Singh is the father of the informant who stated likewise as his two sons.

PW-3 Sugga Devi is the mother of the informant who stated that the accused persons assaulted her husband and her two sons for reasons of partition.

PW-4 Jimdar Singh is the informant, who supported his version given out in the first information report.

PW-5 Dr. Bachha Lal Singh stated that he examined the three injured and found simple injuries on their persons.

PW-6 Sheoji Mishra the only independent witness does not support the case of the prosecution and was declared hostile. PW-7 Upendra Kumar Singh is a formal witness.

I find from the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution that not a single independent witness has supported the factum of the occurrence in which circumstances, it will be difficult to the Court to accept the prosecution case without challenge in the background of active land dispute between the parties. Also in the facts of the case the non-examination of the Investigating Officer is fatal to the prosecution.

Under such circumstances by giving benefit of doubt to the appellants, they are acquitted of the charge u/s 307/34 of the I.P.C. and are also discharged from the liabilities of their respective bail bonds. The judgment and order of conviction dated 27.11.1995 passed in Sessions Trial No. 195 of 1981/164 of 1990 by the 04th Additional Sessions Judge, Saran Chapra is hereby set aside.