Case Facts:
Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.780 of 2012 (3) dt.14-08-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (DB) No.780 of 2012 ====================================================== Jogendra Thakur, Son of Ram Chandar Thakur, Resident of Village- Somgarh, Police Station – Sathi, District – West Champaran. .... .... Appellant Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Megha Singh @ Anirudh Singh, Son of Late Bhagwan Singh 3. Udai Singh, Son of Late Bhagwan Singh 4. Bittu Singh, Son of Dhup Singh 5. Binda Singh, Son of Late Lallan Singh 6. Jamuna Singh, Son of Late Rama Singh 7. Ganesh Thakur, Son of Late Badri Thakur All are resident of Village Somgarh, Police Station – Sathi, District – West Champaran. .... .... Respondents Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar-7, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Ashwini Kumar Sinha, APP. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMARESH KUMAR LAL ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA) 3 14-08-2012 Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and for the State. The appellant has challenged the judgment of acquittal dated 30th of April, 2012 passed in Sessions Trial No. 575 of 2006, relating to Sathi P.S. Case No. 91 of 2003, G.R. Case No. 3331 of 2003, whereby the accused persons Megha Singh @ Anirudh Singh, Udai Singh, Bittu Singh, Binda Singh, Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.780 of 2012 (3) dt.14-08-2012 Jamuna Singh and Ganesh Thakur all of Village Somgarh, Police Station – Sathi, District – West Champaran were acquitted. The appellant is also resident of the same Village, Police Station and District. The First Information Report was registered against unknown under [STATUTE] regarding loot and murder of the informant’s younger brother Jatashankar Thakur aged 19. The trial court has considered all the evidence and facts brought on record and it has doubted the informant’s version and the mind of the trial court that the villagers were not named, the FIR has compelled the court to acquit the accused. The reasons given by the trial court are neither perverse nor irrelevant. Learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that due to panicky from the accused persons they were not named in the First Information Report. The judgment of acquittal can only be interfered with if it is illegal, perverse or beyond the evidence brought on record. The judgment shows that all the plea of the informant and prosecution has been well considered and all replied. Considering this we are not inclined to interfere Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.780 of 2012 (3) dt.14-08-2012 with the judgment of acquittal. In the result, the appeal is without merit and it is accordingly dismissed. KKSINHA/- (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.) (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 396

Statute Text:
Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code. Murder in Dacoity. If any one of five or more persons, who are conjointly committing dacoity, commits murder in so committing dacoity, every one of those persons shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, or rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.