Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.366 OF 1994 [Appeal against the judgment and order dated 7.10.1994 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bettiah in Sessions Trial No.483 of 1993] 1. MANAGER YADAV SON OF BIGA YADAV 2. YASIN MIAN SON OF LATE HABIB MIAN 3. BHOLA CHOUDHARY SON OF KALI CHARAN CHOUDHARY 4. SHANKAR RAUT (YADAV) SON OF KHICHARI YADAV 5. CHHEDI RAUT (YADAV) SON OF RAMASHISH RAUT 6. MANSI RAI SON OF SATAN RAI, APPELLANT NO.1 AND 3 ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PAKRI NONIA TOLE, APPELLANT NO.2, 5 AND 6 ARE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BISHUNPURWA, AND APPELLANT NO.4 IS RESIDENT OF VILALGE GARHIYA, ALL P.S. LAURIYA, DISTRICT WEST CHAMPARAN …………………….. Appellants Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ---------------------- Respondent For the Appellants : Mr. S.N.P. Sinha, Senior Advocate Mr. Ranjan Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Krishna Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent : Dr. Indiwar Kumari, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate --------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J: All the appellants have been convicted u/s. 325/149 I.P.C and sentenced to R.I. for five months and have also been convicted u/s.147 I.P.C. and sentenced to three months R.I. as also appellant no.4 has been convicted u/s.325/109 I.P.C. and sentenced to one and half years by a judgment dated 7.10.1994 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bettiah in Sessions Trial No.483 of 1993. The appellants in addition have been directed to pay a sum of Rs.4000/- each to the wife of the deceased or the next surviving as compensation u/s.357 Cr.P.C. - 2 - and in default of which further sentenced to three months R.I. The prosecution case is that on the date of occurrence, the deceased was waylaid by the accused persons and variously assaulted with iron rods, on account of which he was removed to the Hospital but died later. Initially the appellants were charged u/ss.147 and 302/149 I.P.C. as also u/s.302 I.P.C., but they were acquitted of the charges and convicted as mentioned above. During trial, the prosecution has examined seven witnesses in all. Out of whom, P.W.1 and P.W.5 are eye witnesses, whereas the P.W.2 is a part eye-witness and P.W.3 is on the point of dying declaration having been made by the deceased, her husband. P.W.4 is the doctor, who held the postmortem examination and P.W.6 and P.W.7 are the Investigating Officers. The defence on its behalf examined one witness on the point of relationship of the accused persons with some other persons, who have been earlier accused in a murder case. They also brought a number of documents in support of that earlier case to show that they had enmity and there was a possibility of false implication. On going through the evidence of the eye witnesses, I find that all of them have been consistent on the point of assault by the appellants with iron rods and it is completely corroborated by the doctor’s evidence, who found such injuries on the person of the deceased resulting in his death. Moreover the corroborative - 3 - witnesses, who came after the occurrence, also saw the appellants fleeing away from the place of occurrence and the wife of the informant supported the factum of the oral dying declaration before the police in which the deceased had alleged specifically the role of each of the accused in assault upon him. Under the circumstances, I am not inclined to interfere in the conviction. However, in the facts of the case, the period already undergone by the appellants would suffice for their conviction under the various sections but the amount of compensation is increased to a sum of Rs.5000/- each. Each of the appellants, named above (if alive), shall pay a sum of Rs.5000/- to the wife/family of the deceased within a period of eight weeks of receipt of such a notice from the Trial Court and failure to do so they shall be sentenced to a period of six months R.I. With the modifications as mentioned aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed. Patna High Court Dated, 5th April, 2011. NAFR/ Narendra/ ( Anjana Prakash, J. )