Case Facts:
Patna High Court G. APP. (DB) No.18 of 2012 (3) dt.28-09-2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Govt. Appeal (DB) No.18 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. The State Of Bihar .... .... Appellant Versus 1. Kedar Sah S/O Biso Sah R/O Village - Thadhi Bahuarwa, P.S. Salkhua, District - Saharsa 2. Anandi Sah S/O Late Babuan Sah R/O Village - Thadhi Bahuarwa, P.S. Salkhua, District - Saharsa 3. Prithwi Chandra Sah S/O Chhotakan Sah R/O Village - Thadhi Bahuarwa, P.S. Salkhua, District - Saharsa 4. Subhash Sah S/O Prithwi Chandra Sah R/O Village - Thadhi Bahuarwa, P.S. Salkhua, District - Saharsa 5. Jai Jai Ram Sah @ Jai Kumar Bharti S/O Biso Sah R/O Village - Thadhi Bahuarwa, P.S. Salkhua, District – Saharsa .... .... Respondent ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr.Shiwesh Chandra Mishra, APP For the Respondent/s : None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMARESH KUMAR LAL ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA) ------------- 3 28-09-2012 This Govt. Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 21.06.2012 passed by Sri Ram Pratap Asthana, Additional Sessions Judge, Saharsa in Sessions Trial Case No. 17 of 2000 relating to G.R.Case No. 330 of 1996 arising out Salakhuwa P.S.Case No. 23 of 1996 whereby the accused persons (respondent nos. 1 to 5 in this appeal) have been acquitted of the charge under [STATUTE] . We perused the judgment. From the judgment it is apparent that the informant Sita Devi and all the accused persons were residents of the same village. The accused persons are not Patna High Court G. APP. (DB) No.18 of 2012 (3) dt.28-09-2012 named in the first information report. Subsequently the informant named the accused persons adding some other facts. The case was that eight persons assembled but at that time the informant did not specify about the accused persons. The informant’s husband was taken away from the house and was shot dead. The police after investigation submitted final form but the court after differing with the police report took cognizance and case proceeded. The trial court considered the circumstances which came on record and has taken into account that in the first information report the accused persons were not named, it has come in evidence that the informant had illicit relationship with others and the Investigating Officer has also not been examined and found that there are vital contradictions which went to the root of the case and the trial court doubted the version of the prosecution. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the trial court found the case to be not true against the accused persons, hence acquitted them. The judgment has been passed with reasonings and reasonings enunciated are enough to show that the evidence was not so clinching to convict the accused persons. In our view, the judgment is neither perverse nor illegal, so it requires no Patna High Court G. APP. (DB) No.18 of 2012 (3) dt.28-09-2012 interference by this Court. In the result, the appeal is without merit and is accordingly dismissed. Tahir/- (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.