Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 256 OF 1994 In the matter of an appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. ************ 1. Yogendra Prasad Yadav. 2. Upendra Yadav. Both sons of Mangan Yadav. 3. Sukhdeo Yadav, S/o Apat Yadav. 4. Tarni Yadav, S/o Buchan Yadav. 5. Balram Yadav. 6. Ram Pukar Yadav. Both sons of Mangan Yadav. 7. Satya Narain Yadav @ Satto Pd. Yadav, S/o Bhuchan Yadav. 8. Upendra Yadav, S/o Mangan Yadav. 9. Thakko Yadav, S/o Uchit Yadav. 10. Bhumi Yadav, S/o Ajab Yadav. 11. Bandelal Yadav. 12. Chhotelal Yadav. Both sons of Apat Yadav. 13. Ramdeo Yadav, S/o Sukhdeo Yadav. 14. Bhola Yadav, S/o Thakuri Yadav. 15. Jhingur Yadav, S/o Babuji Yadav. 16. Narain Yadav, S/o Mangan Yadav. 17. Buchan Yadav, S/o Jamun Yadav. 18. Dilo Yadav, S/o Mangan Yadav. 19. Baso Yadav, S/o Ajab Yadav. 20. Bhumi Yadav, S/o Baldeo Yadav. All R/o Village-Sirwar, P.S.-Mahishi, District-Saharsa. ……………..(Appellants) Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR------(Respondent) ************ For the Appellants : Mr. Anil Kumar Mukund, Adv. For the State : Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta, APP. ************ P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ************* Anjana Prakash, J. The appellants have been convicted under Sections 148, 379 and 147 IPC and sentence to one year and six months RI respectively in Sessions Case No. 47/79 by the judgment dated 08.08.1994 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Saharsa. The case of the prosecution is according to P.W. 5 is that on account of land dispute the accused persons variously armed forming an unlawful assembly assaulted the injured and committed murder of one Babujee Mushar. After close of investigation, charge- sheet was submitted under Section 302/149 IPC and other allied Sections and the appellants were charged under Section 302/149 IPC and other allied Sections but since there was absolutely no evidence with regard to the death of the deceased in this occurrence apart from the oral statements of the witnesses the appellants were discharged under Sections 302 and 302/149 IPC and convicted as mentioned above. During trial the prosecution examined six witnesses out of whom P.W. 6 is formal whereas P.W. 5 is the informant and the rest of the witnesses are also on the point of occurrence. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellants that once the major part of the prosecution story has been disbelieved by the Court below on account of the close examination of the evidence of Doctor and the Investigating Officer the conviction of the appellants for minor offences also does not seem to be reliable and is without cogent proof. I am inclined to agree with the submission made on behalf of the appellants that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt and, therefore, the appellants are acquitted of charges. In view of such, the appeal is allowed and the judgment dated 08.08.1994 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Saharsa in Sessions Case No. 47/79 is set aside. The appellants are discharged of the liability of their bail bonds. The appeal stands allowed. (Anjana Prakash, J.) Patna High Court, Patna, Dated, the 1st April, 2011. NAFR/Vikash/-