Sudarshan Rai and Others vs State of Bihar

Mandhata Singh, J.—Fardbeyan of Sita Rai is recorded by the Police for basing F.I.R. which is to the effect that he was at his Khalihan, there was some altercation in between accused Sudarshan Rai appellant no.1 and his brother Sadhu Rai. His brother was asking about erecting of a Tanti in between the space of house of the informant and accused appellants, reacting thereon Sudarshan Rai went his home, came with gun and shot the fire on Sadhu Rai which hit his buttock, for other appellants it is said that they also came and assaulted the informant and his party men specifying that Sitaram Rai assaulted Shiv Chandra Rai by means of Bhala on his head, Bahal Rai assaulted Sadhu Rai by means of Lathi, Vishwanath Rai assaulted the informant on his back and Dhaneshwar Rai assaulted Shiv Chandra Rai by means of Bhala. Witnesses came and accused persons left the place of occurrence.

After investigation charge sheet submitted, trial commenced and ended in conviction and sentence to appellant nos. 1, 4 and 5 under sections 324 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code and appellant nos. 2 and 3 under sections 323 and 147 of the Indian Penal Code.

After arguing the case at length on merit of conviction also learned counsel for the appellants preferred to press the appeal on the point of sentence only referring circumstances appearing in the case that land dispute was there in between the parties, for the incident there is counter version of the case also vide Barh P.S. Case No. 144 of 1983.

12 accused persons faced the trial and only five have been convicted.

Appellant no.1 Sudarshan Rai is alleged causing firing upon Sadhu Rai hitting his buttock but no injury report was available and appellants remained under litigation for a period of more than 27 years, specifying more it is submitted by learned counsel that appellant nos.2 and 3 who are convicted and sentenced for the offence under sections 147 and 323 are entitled for relief u/s 3 of the Probation of Offenders Act and appellant nos. 1, 4 and 5 are entitled for relief u/s 4 of Probation of Offenders Act.

After taking into consideration the suggested circumstances and factum of the case, I agree with the submission of learned counsel. It is made clear that appellants are first offender having no criminal antecedent at all.

In the result the appeal is allowed in part. Conviction to all the appellants is affirmed for the respective offences which they have been convicted and on the point of sentence appellants 2 and 3 are released after due admonition and appellant nos. 1, 4 and 5 are directed to be released on their entering into a bond undertaking therein for a period of one year to keep peace and be of good behaviour and to appear and receive the sentence when call upon during such period.

As the appellants are on bail, they shall stand discharged from their liabilities of their respective bail bonds.

Let a copy of this judgment along with lower court records be sent back to the trial court forthwith.