Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA ***** Criminal Appeal (DB) No.611 of 2005 Against the judgment of conviction dated 16.08.2005 and order of sentence dated 19.08.2005 passed by Shri Sunil Kumar Panwar, the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi in Sessions Trial No. 548 of 2004/18 of 2005. =========================================================== 1. Manoj Kumar Singh @ Manoj Singh, Son of Sri Baidyanath Singh 2. Baidyanath Singh, Son of Late Ram Sewak Singh. Both Resident of Village-Azamgarh, Police Station-Dumra, District- Sitamarhi. .... .... Appellants. Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent. with Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 659 of 2005 =========================================================== Manish Kumar Singh, Son of Sri Baidyanath Singh, Resident of Village- Azamgarh, Police Station-Dumra, District-Sitamarhi. .... .... Appellant. Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent. =========================================================== Appearance : (In Both the Appeals) For the Appellants : Mr. Rana Pratap Singh, Sr. Advocate. Mr. Aaruni Singh, Advocate. Mr. Prabhat Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Ashwini Kumar Sinha, APP. For the Informant : Mr. S. Alamdar Hussain, Advocate. Mr. Navendu Kumar, Advocate. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMARESH KUMAR LAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA) Date: 06-07-2012 Criminal Appeal No. 611 of 2005 (DB) of Manoj Kumar Singh @ Manoj Singh and his father Baidyanath Singh and Criminal Appeal No. 659 of 2005 (DB) of Manish Kumar Singh, Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.611 of 2005 dt.06-07-2012 2 Son of Baidyanath Singh arise out of judgment of conviction dated 16th of August, 2005 and order of sentence dated 19.08.2005 passed in Sessions Trial No. 548 of 2004 / 18 of 2005 in connection with Dumra P.S. Case No. 75 of 2004, G.R. Case No. 794 of 2004, whereby the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi held the appellants guilty under [STATUTE] . Appellant Manish Kumar Singh was also held guilty under [STATUTE] and Section 27 of the Arms Act and by order dated 19th of August, 2005 all the three appellants were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for offence under [STATUTE] and they were also directed to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- each. Appellant Manish Kumar Singh was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years for offence under Section 27 (3) of the Arms Act. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently and in default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment for two years were awarded. 2. Against the judgment two appeals were preferred before this Court which have been heard together and both the appeals are being disposed of by this judgment. 3. The appeals relate to an occurrence of 08.30 p.m. on 14.06.2004, the fardbeyan (Ext. 3) which led to Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.611 of 2005 dt.06-07-2012 3 registration of formal FIR (Ext.7) was that Rajiv Ranjan – son of the informant on 04.30 p.m. proceeded to Sitamarhi on his motorcycle for getting some articles for worship. At 9.00 p.m. on the same date the informant received information that his son Rajiv Ranjan has been shot dead near Lohiya Bridge of Jagdishpur Village. On that information, the informant P.W.10 Umesh Prasad Singh @ Kaali Singh rushed to the place of occurrence and found his son having gun shot injury and was being carried by police personnel for treatment to Sadar Hospital, Sitamarhi and he accompanied them. Immediately, on arrival the informant was told that his son was no more. A land dispute was going on between the informant and his brother Baidyanath Singh. On the date of occurrence, an altercation has taken place between them where Manoj Kumar Singh and Manish Kumar Singh were present there. The accused persons have uprooted the plants of the informant and the plants were set on fire. The informant came to know from the residence of Village Jagdishpur that when Rajiv Ranjan (the deceased) was coming from Sitamarhi then a pillion rider was with him and that pillion rider has fired at his son and after firing he fled towards Azamgarh Village. After recording the fardbeyan, formal FIR Dumra P.S. Case No. 75 of 2004 against unknown under [STATUTE] and Section 27 of the Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.611 of 2005 dt.06-07-2012 4 Arms Act was registered and the investigation proceeded. In course of investigation, three appellants were made accused. The place of occurrence was investigated. Statement of witnesses under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. was recorded. The inquest report (Ext. 5) containing the signatures of Sanjay Kumar (Ext. 1) and Rajiv Ranjan Pandey (Ext. 1/1) was prepared. The post-mortem report (Ext. 4) obtained from the hospital. Statement of witnesses Amrit Rai and Chhotan Das was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C (Ext. 8 and 8/1 respectively). 4. After investigation charge sheet was submitted. The case was committed to the court of Sessions, cognizance was taken and charge under [STATUTE] and Section 27 (3) of the Arms Act was explained to Manish Kumar Singh, whereas, charge under [STATUTE] was explained to all the three accused persons. They pleaded not guilty and hence the trial proceeded. 5. The defence of all the accused persons was of false implication and also that they have been framed on account of enmity. Nobody has seen the occurrence. Even if the first version of the informant is believed then one pillion rider of Rajiv Ranjan (the deceased) might have caused death. After considering the evidence on record the court came to the opinion that the Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.611 of 2005 dt.06-07-2012 5 prosecution has been able to prove the ch

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.