Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (DB) No.225 of 1988 ***** Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 05th May, 1988 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, II Barh in Sessions Trial No. 1089 of 1986. =========================================================== 1. Md. Quamruddin Siddiqui, Son of Late Mohd. Nooruddin (deceased), 2. Mohd. Aurangzeb, Son of Mohd. Quamruddin Siddiequi, Both residents of Mohalla-Choindi, Police Station-Barh, District-Patna. .... .... Appellants. Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent. =========================================================== Appearance : For the Appellants : Mr. S.M. Nemetullah, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Shashi Bala Verma, APP. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMARESH KUMAR LAL ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 25-01-2012 (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA) ***** Mohd. Quamruddin Siddiqui and his son Mohd. Aurangjeb have been convicted for the offence under [STATUTE] and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, II Barh by his judgment and order dated 5th of May, 1988 in Sessions Trial No. 1089 of 1986. 2. On the fardbeyan (Ext.4) a formal First Information Report (Ext.5) relating to Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.225 of 1988 dt.25-01-2012 2 Barh P.S. Case No. 0181 of 1985 under [STATUTE] and Section 27 of the Arms Act was registered on the basis of fardbeyan of P.W.6 Md. Manjoor Alam which was recorded by inspector Khurshid Hasan P.W.8, on 26.07.1985, in emergency ward of Barh hospital on 10.45 P.M. According to Manjoor Alam at about preceding 8.15 P.M. he was sitting in a chair in his residential compound. Md. Badruzzama P.W.1 and son of the informant Md. Heyat (the deceased) were also sitting in different chairs. One Akhtar Hussain P.W.2 was sitting on a cot. Suddenly appellant no.1 Quamruddin Siddiqui, Advocate and his sons Md. Aurangzeb appellant no.2 and Md. Parwez (absconder) came towards eastern compound wall and started hurling abuses. After hearing the abuses, the informant’s son Md. Heyat stood up and thereafter Quamruddin Siddiqui, Advocate and his son Md. Aurangzeb instigated Md. Parwez to kill and in the meanwhile Parwez fired from his country made pistol causing injury upon his chest. He fell down and the accused persons escaped. On the sound of firing the villagers Kamo Mian (not examined), Chunnu Mian (not examined) and Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.225 of 1988 dt.25-01-2012 3 others arrived. The informant’s younger son Mahboob Alam P.W.5 came out from the house. The injured was brought immediately to the hospital but sometimes thereafter he died. The informant was constructing a septic latrine upon his house and it was being protested. On account of that the informant’s son was killed. It was a moonlit light and three lanterns were giving light. The place from where Md. Parwez was shot was a compound up to the height of the chest. The fardbeyan resulted into formal First Information Report. The inquest report (Ext.6) and the seizure list (Ext.7) containing signatures (Ext.1, 1/4) were prepared. The post-mortem report was obtained. In course of investigation, the sketch map of the place of occurrence was prepared. The Forensic Science Laboratory report (Ext.3) was obtained and charge sheet was submitted against the accused persons who have been put on trial. The person who is alleged to shot has remained absconding. Cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the court of Sessions after observing paraphernalia of the case. The accused persons appeared and charge Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.225 of 1988 dt.25-01-2012 4 under [STATUTE] was explained. They pleaded their innocence and so the trial proceeded. 3. The defence of the appellants is of false implication on account of enmity and also that appellant no.1 at the time of occurrence was in Chondhi Mosque. 4. The trial court after analyzing the evidence came to the opinion that the prosecution has been able to prove the charge against these appellants against the order of conviction and sentences, this appeal has been preferred. 5. This Court is required to reappraise the evidence and to see as to whether the prosecution was able to prove the charge against the appellant beyond shadow of all reasonable doubts or not. 6. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution has examined P.W.1 Md. Badruzzama, P.W.2 Md. Akhtar Hussain, P.W.3 Md. Enamul Haque, P.W.4 Md. Imran @ Chunnu Mian, P.W.5 Md. Mahboob Alam, P.W.6 Md. Manjoor Alam, Dr. Shankar Pd. Deokuliar and P.W.8 Khurshid Hasan. P.W.8 is the investigating officer of the case and P.W.7 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.225 of 1988 dt.25-01-2012 5 is the doctor who has conducted the post- mortem upon the dead body. 7. P.W.7 was posted as C.A.S. at Sub-Divisional Hospital Barh on 27.07.1985 and on that date he held post-mortem at 08.30 A.M. on the body of Md. Heyat, son of Md. Manzoor Alam brought by Constable No. 445 Ramanuj Sharma and one Mahboob Alam (both not examined) and the doctor found the following ante mortem injuries: (I). Oval lacerated wound 1 1/2” diameter deep into the chest cavity – on the right side of the chest below nipple. (II). 21 Oval wounds of 1/4” diameter and depth varying from 1/4” to 1” around the aforesaid Injury No. I. (III). Elliptical lacerated wound of 1/2”x1/4”x deep in the chest cavity just above and lateral to Injury No. I. 8. On opening the doctor found fracture of 6th and 7th ribs and right lung lacerated. Liver completely lacerated on right half. Hepatic vessels also lacerated pylorus of stomach lacerated with fracture of Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.225 of 1988 dt.25-01-2012 6 the 8th and 9th ribs on the back. A portion of a cartridge wa

Applicable IPC Section: 302

Statute Text:
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Murder. Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.