Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.963 of 2007 *** Against the judgment and order of sentence dated 30.8.2007 and 31.8.2007 passed in Sessions Trial no. 22/1991/6/2007 by Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. III, Madhubani. =========================================================== Gyanchand Mochi .... .... Appellant Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent with Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 896 of 2007 =========================================================== 1. Srichand Mochi 2. Binod Mochi .... .... Appellants Versus The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent =========================================================== Appearance: For the Appellants: Mr. Ajay Mishra, Amicus Curiae (In both the appeals) For the Respondent: Mr. S.N.Prasad, A.P.P (In both the appeals) =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANDHATA SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 03-05-2012 Statement/Fardbeyan of Banarsi Mochi has been made basis for the F.I.R. which, in brief, is that on the day of occurrence that is on 16.5.1990 at about 12.30 PM the village Chaukidar went to the house of accused Gyanchand Mochi and Srichand Mochi to ask about stolen bicycle. Wives of both accused persons abused him by saying that only informant told him the name of both accused persons. Informant only was at his home. His brother Panchu Mochi had gone to Sakari for diesel. 2. At the time of occurrence, that is at about 9.00 PM the informant was sitting on a bullock cart at his door after taking meal along with his father Asharfi Mochi, his brother Panchu Mochi, Mahabir Mochi and Chaukidar Sita Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.963 of 2007 dt.03-05-2012 2 Ram Sadai. In the meantime, accused appellants namely Gyanchand Mochi, Srichand Mochi and Binod Mochi armed with Lathi came there. They began to abuse the informant and others. Chaukidar Sita Ram Sadai protested the accused from abusing with request to not quarrel but was not responded. Accused appellant Gyanchand gave a lathi blow on the head of Panchu Mochi. He fell down from cart on earth. Informant’s father laid down on Panchu Mochi in order to save him but was assaulted by Gyanchand Mochi. Accused Srichaned Mochi and Binod Mochi also assaulted the deceased by means of Lathi. Chaukidar also received injuries. Injured Panchu Mochi was taken to Hospital but was declared dead by the doctor. Post mortem conducted on dead body of the deceased. 3. Charge sheet submitted in the case and the trial ended in conviction and sentence to accused appellants for the offence under [STATUTE] . 4. In all 11 witnesses are examined in the case. P.W.1 Mahabir Mochi, P.W.2 Sita Ram Sadai Chaukidar, P.W.3 Asharfi Mochi father of the deceased, P.W.4 Parmila Devi wife of the informant, P.W.5 Laxmi Devi wife of the deceased, P.W.6 Umesh Mochi son of the informant, P.W.7 Janaki Devi mother of deceased, P.W.8 Dr. Sharda Nand Jha, conducted post mortem examination, P.W.9 Banarsi Mochi informant of the case, P.W.10 Ramedo Mahto and P.W.11 Suman Kant Jha. 5. P.Ws 10 and 11 are formal witnesses. Apart from these formal witnesses and P.W.8 the doctor conducting post mortem examination, all the witnesses are there to state that first blow of Lathi was caused on behalf of Gyanchand Mochi on the head of deceased. He fell down from the cart, thereafter the deceased, informant and Chaukidar all were assaulted by accused appellants. On this point there is no contradiction in the statement of any of the witnesses. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.963 of 2007 dt.03-05-2012 3 6. Plea of dark night and means of identification have fully been discussed and replied in its judgment by the trial court otherwise also accused appellants are known to the witnesses and assault was caused by accused appellants from the close range. So, the conclusion reached by the trial court in its judgment needs no interference by this Court which is not suffered by any infirmity or mistake also. 7. On the point of sentence, it is submitted on behalf of learned Amicus Curiae that main assailant is Gyanchand Mochi appellant of Cr. Appeal No. 963 of 2007 remained in custody for a period of five years and ten months and rest two of Cr. Appeal No. 896 of 2007 remained in custody for a period of near about five months having allegation of causing injuries to the deceased, informant or Chaukidar but the all simple in nature and on non-vital part of the body. So, the period undergone by them may be observed sufficient. I agree with the submission of learned Amicus Curiae. 8. On the observations made above, evidence on record and circumstances of the case, both the appeals are dismissed with modification on the point of sentence. Accordingly, conviction of all the accused appellants in Sessions Trial no. 22/1991/6/2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. III, Madhubani is affirmed and on the point of sentence, the period undergone by them in course of trial or after conviction is observed sufficient. 9. Appellants Srichand Mochi and Binod Mochi of Cr. Appeal No. 896 of 2007 are on bail, so, they are discharged from the liabilities of their bail bonds and set at liberty. Appellant Gyanchand Mochi of Cr. Appeal No. 963 of 2007 is in custody, hence he is ordered to be released at once, if not wanted in any other case. 10. Let a copy of this judgment along with lower court records be Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.963 of 2007 dt.03-05-2012 4 sent back to the trial court. 11. Let a copy of first page and last page of this judgment be handed over to learned Amicus Curiae appearing for accused appellants for needful. A.I./- (Mandhata Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 304

Statute Text:
Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code. Culpable homicide not amounting to murder, If act by which the death is caused is done with intention of causing death, etc. Whoever commits culpable homicide not amounting to murder shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death; or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, or with fine, or with both, if the act is done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death, but without any intention to cause death, or to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.