Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (DB) No.85 of 1990 =========================================================== Murad Ali, son of Md. Kayam, resident of village-Maharani Pokhar, P.S.-Nagar, District-Muzaffarpur. .... .... Appellant/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent/s with Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 95 of 1990 =========================================================== Mohd. Murtuza, son of Abdul Aziz, resident of village-Maharaji Pokhar, P.S.-Town District-Muzaffarpur. .... .... Appellant/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent/s with Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 131 of 1990 =========================================================== Mohd. Chunnu, son of Fazle Hussain, resident of Chandwara, P.S.-Muzaffarpur Town, District-Muzaffarpur. .... .... Appellant/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent/s with Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 140 of 1990 =========================================================== Bablu @ Mohammad Salam, son of Md. Sadik, resident of Kachchi Saraya Chackbas, Police Station-Mithanpura, District-Muzaffarpur. .... .... Appellant/s Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance: (In CR. APP (DB) No. 85 of 1990) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Vindhya Keshari Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Shashi Bala Verma, A.P.P. (In CR. APP (DB) No. 95 of 1990) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Vindhya Keshari Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Shashi Bala Verma, A.P.P. (In CR. APP (DB) No. 131 of 1990) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Vindhya Keshari Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Advocate -2- For the State : Mrs. Shashi Bala Verma, A.P.P. (In CR. APP (DB) No. 140 of 1990) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Vindhya Keshari Kumar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Shashi Bala Verma, A.P.P. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI CAV JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI) Date: 17-10-2012 1. Criminal Appeal No.85 of 1990 filed on behalf of appellant Murad Ali @ Lalan, Criminal Appeal No.95 of 1990 filed by appellant Md. Murtuza, Criminal Appeal No.131 of 1990 filed by Md. Chunnu and Criminal Appeal No.140 of 1990 filed by Babloo @ Md. Salam originating out of common judgment dated 01.03.1990 passed by Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in Sessions Trial No.126 of 1985 convicting all the above named appellants for an offence punishable under [STATUTE] and sentencing them to undergo R.I. for life, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The prosecution case in brief based on the fardbeyan of Lalit Kumar (deceased) recorded at 10:00 P.M. on 23.01.1985 is that in the same night he along with Lalan, who is the brother of Akhtar, resident of Maharaji Pokhar, Babloo son of Md. Sadik, resident of mohalla- Kachchi Saraya and two others had taken toddy in a shop situated in the back portion of Marwari High School and thereafter the informant had gone to answer the call of the nature. The informant has alleged that in the meantime all the aforesaid four persons came near him and having encircled him had severely assaulted as a result whereof he had sustained injury in his nose upper lips and neck as also a cut -3- injury on his lips. As per the informant he could not see the weapons by which he was assaulted due to darkness. It is the further case of the informant that he could anyhow however rescue himself and had reached at Amar Cinema Chowk crossing through Khadi Bhandar and on being advised by people to report the matter to the Police Station he after making enquiry had been able to locate reach the police station with great difficulty. The informant had also claimed that he had come to Muzaffarpur Town yesterday i.e. 22.01.1985 for the treatment of his pain in stomach by Dr. R.P. Gupta. In the concluding portion of the fardbeyan the informant had also stated that though he did not know the names of the two other person accompanying Lalan and Babloo but they were friends of Lalan and Babloo. 3. On the basis of the aforementioned fardbeyan of the informant Lalit Kumar, Muzaffarpur Town P.S. Case No.34 / 1985 dated 23.01.1985 was instituted at 11:30 P.M. initially for an offence under [STATUTE] and the informant was also sent to the hospital for his treatment. Subsequently, when the informant had succumbed to his injuries, offence under [STATUTE] was added on the requisition of the police official by the order of the court dated 25.01.1985. The police after investigation had submitted a charge sheet not only against appellants Murad Ali @ Lalan and Babloo @ Md. Salam but also against appellants Md. Murtuza and Md. Chunnu and their trial was conducted leading to the impugned judgment and these four separate appeals by all four of the appellants. 4. The defence case as is evident from mode of cross-examination -4- as well as from the statement recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. is one of total denial of the occurrence as well as of false implication of the appellant. There has been also denial on behalf of appellant / convict Murad Ali @ Lalan that actually he has got no alias name as Lalan and to support the same he has also examined one D.W. as well as has also exhibited certain documents as Exhibit- A and B. The appellants have also specifically denied with regard to having made any inclupatory extra judicial confession leading to recovery of the wearing apparel of the deceased. 5. While assailing the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence, it has been argued by Mr. Vindhya Keshari Kumar, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of all the appellants that the same happens to be a product and out come of complete non-application of judicial mind. To su

Applicable IPC Section: 307

Statute Text:
Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Attempt to murder. Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and, if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to imprisonment for life, or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned. Attempts by Life Convicts: When any person offending under this section is under sentence of imprisonment for life, he may, if hurt is caused, be punished with death.