Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.99 of 2000 =========================================================== 1. Kameshwar Mistry, son of Biltan Mistry. 2. Kant Mochi, son of late Vishawanath Mochi. 3. Binod Mochi, son of Garbhu Mochi. 4. Raja Ram Mochi, son of Bhimu Mochi. 5. Rama Nand Mochi, son of Shama Mochi. 6. BiganMochi, son of Jamun Mochi. 7. Jadu Mochi, son of ShamaMochi. All residents of village Fatehpur, P.S. Didarganj, District Patna. .... .... Appellants Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent =========================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant : Mr. F.R. Mallick, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P. =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SHEEMA ALI KHAN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 26-06-2012 S.A. Khan, J. This appeal arises out of a judgment passed on 31.1.2000 in Sessions Trial No. 6 of 1987 by the Additional District & Sessions Judge-X, Patna convicting the appellants to undergo R.I. for one year under [STATUTE] . 2. The date of occurrence is 23.3.1986. It is alleged that on the day of Holi all the appellants variously armed came to the place of occurrence and assaulted Shailesh Kumar who was admitted in the emergency ward of Nalanda Medical College & Hospital. His uncle gave ‘Beyan’ on 24.3.1986 at 12 noon. In this case except for minor Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.99 of 2000 dt.26-06-2012 2 / 3 2 variation the witnesses have supported the occurrence and have specified the manner in which the injury was inflicted on Shailesh Kumar by lathi, rod, katta and fist. It has been alleged that Shailesh Kumar could be saved because of the timely intervention of others. 3. It has been argued on behalf of the appellants that there is no injury report to support the occurrence and that the Investigating Officer has not been examined to substantiate the case of the witnesses and statements given before him regarding the manner and place of occurrence and as such it is fit case in which this Court should set aside the judgment and order. 4. Having considered all the materials, this Court finds that the occurrence took place in the year 1986 i.e. almost 25 years ago and as such it would not be proper to send the appellants back to custody after a gap of so many years specially in the absence of the injury report and non-examination of the doctor and the Investigating Officer. 5. In the result, this court dismisses this appeal with modification in sentence as period undergone and subject to payment of fine of Rs. 100/- each to be paid by the appellants to the injured in this case. The appellants will deposit the fine of Rs. 100/- each before the Trial Court who will ensure that the amount of fine is given to the injured or his legal heir (if the injured is not alive) within a period of 4 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.99 of 2000 dt.26-06-2012 3 / 3 3 months from today. On payment of fine the appellants would be discharged from the liabilities of their bail bonds furnished earlier in this case. Patna High Court, The 26th of June, 2012, N.A.F.R./Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)

Applicable IPC Section: 147

Statute Text:
Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code. Rioting. Whoever is guilty of rioting, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.