Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.308 of 2008 ====================================================== Subodh Kumar Singh, son of Late Nathuni Prasad Singh, resident of village-Aspura, P.S.-Bikram, District-Patna. .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Jay Nandan Sharma @ Nandu Singh, son of Late Ramashray Singh, resident of village-Daurwa, P.S.-Dulhin Bazar in the district of Patna. 3. Sunil Kumar Singh @ Sunil Kumar, son of Satyadeo Singh, resident of village-Gorakhri, P.S.-Bikram in the district of Patna. 4. Arbind Kumar Singh @ Arbind Singh, son of Sri Wakil Singh, resident of village-Gayachak, Mohammadpur, P.S.-Janipur in the district of Patna. 5. Arbind Singh, son of Late Dhanushdhari Singh, resident of village- Gorakhri, P.S.-Bikram in the district of Patna. 6. Agam Kumar Singh @ Agam Singh, son of Sri Sudeshwar Singh, resident of village-Gorakhri, P.S.-Bikram in the district of Patna. 7. Satyanand Sharma @ Satya Singh, son of Sri Rajendra Singh, resident of village-Nisarpur, P.S.-Bikram in the district of Patna. 8. Anil Kumar Singh @ Tinku. 9. Rajiv Kumar @ Gabbu Singh. 10. Ashwani Kumar @ Pappu. O.P. No. 8 to 10 sons of Sri Krishnanandan Singh, resident of village- Nisarpur, P.S.-Bikram in the district of Patna. .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Akhileshwar Prasad Singh, Senior Advocate. For the O. P. No. 2 : Mr. Abhimanyu Sharma, Advocate. For the O.P. No. 6 : Mr. Ajay Thakur, Adovcate. For O.P. No. 7 & 10 : Mr. Rana Pratap Singh, Senior Advocate Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate. Mr. Manoranjan Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 8 10-09-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsels appearing on behalf of the opposite parties. Patna High Court CR. REV. No.308 of 2008 (8) dt.10-09-2012 2 / 9 2 In Sessions Trial No. 1003 of 1994 opposite party nos. 2 to 4 were charged under [STATUTE] . Opposite party no. 4 Arbind Kumar Singh @ Arbind Singh, opposite party no. 9 Rajiv Kumar @ Gabbu Singh, opposite party no. 2 Jay Nandan Sharma @ Nandu Singh were further charged under [STATUTE] . Opposite party no. 9 Rajiv Kumar @ Gabbu Singh and opposite party no. 5 Arbind Singh were further separately charged under [STATUTE] and Section 27 of the Arms Act. By judgment dated 15th December, 2007, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-X, Patna acquitted opposite party nos. 2 to 10 of the aforesaid case. The petitioner has challenged the aforesaid judgment of the trial court in the present revision application filed under Sections 379 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The prosecution case, in short, as disclosed in the fardbeyan of the petitioner recorded on 29th May, 1991 at about 9.15 p.m. by Sri Ramesh Kumar Sharma, Officer-In-Charge of Bikram Police Station is that on the same day at about 7 p.m., accused Arbind Singh, Agam Singh, Pappu Singh and Satya Singh along with Nandu Singh came at the door of the informant on a jeep. The accused Arbind Singh and Agam Singh invited the Patna High Court CR. REV. No.308 of 2008 (8) dt.10-09-2012 3 / 9 3 deceased, brother of the informant, namely, Chandra Bhushan Singh for feast at the brick kiln of Satya Singh on the pretext that the dispute relating to bus between the parties has been resolved amicably. It has further been stated in the fardbeyan that the deceased Chandra Bhushan Singh went to attend the feast along with the informant (P.W. 3), Gopal Singh (P.W. 1) and Anil Singh (P.W. 20 in a jeep to the brick kiln of Satya Singh. The informant was also carrying his licensed rifle with 12 live cartridges. When they reached at the brick kiln of Satya Singh in village-Dadupur, Manoranjan Singh, Arbind Singh, Pappu Singh, Tinku Singh, Gabbu Singh and Sunil Singh were already present there from before. The informant and others were served with cooked rice and chicken. While they were taking their meal, Agam Singh suddenly picked up the rifle of the informant from behind Arbind Singh and took position with his own rifle. In the meantime, Satya Singh ordered to shoot upon which, Arbind Singh and Gabbu Singh fired on Chandra Bhushan Singh, who fell down and died on the spot. The other accused persons, namely, Pappu Singh, Tinku Singh, Agam Singh, Sunil Singh and Arbind Singh surrounded the informant and others. The other accused persons took away the dead body of the deceased as well Patna High Court CR. REV. No.308 of 2008 (8) dt.10-09-2012 4 / 9 4 as the rifle along with cartridges belonging to the informant. The informant and others fled away from there immediately and when they got opportunity, they came to the police station where the fardbeyan of the informant was recorded. On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant a formal F.I.R. was drawn up on 25th September, 1991 at about 9.15 a.m. and Bikram P.S. Case No. 113 of 1991 was registered for the offence punishable under [STATUTE] and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The police on conclusion of investigation submitted the charge sheet. After supply of police paper in terms of Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the case was committed to the court of sessions for trial. The trial court framed charge against the accused persons in the manner stated above. The opposite party nos. 2 to 10 denied the charges and claimed to be tried. In course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, in all, five witnesses were examined. Out of them, P.W. 3 Subodh Kumar Singh is the informant of the case whereas P.W. 1 Gopal Singh and P.W. 2 Anil Kumar Singh claim to be eye-witnesses to the occurrence. P.W. 4 Dr. Krishnanandan Prasad Singh is the doctor who held the post mortem examination on the dead b

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.