Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.149 OF 1994 [Appeal against the judgment and order dated 20.5.1994 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Buxar in Sessions Trial No.61 of 1991] 1. NIRANJAN PAL SON OF SRI JEONATH PAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JAMROAD, P.S. DIANARA, DISTRICT ROHTAS 2. HARENDRA PAL SON OF SRI RAMDHARI PAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MAIRA, P.S. DIANARA, DISTRICT ROHTAS 3. PREM CHAND PAL SON OF LATE DASHRATH PAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHARITRAWAN BUXAR, P.S. BUXAR, DISTRICT BUXAR 4. RAMJEE PRASAD PAL SON OF RAM PRASAD PAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHARITRAWAN BAZAR, P.S. BUXAR, DISTT. BUXAR 5. BISHWANATH RAM SON OF SHEO PRASANNA RAM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MAIRA, P.S. DIANARA, DISTRICT ROHTAS 6. RAJA RAM MALLAH SON OF BADRI MALLAH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE CHARITRAWAN BUXAR, P.S. BUXAR, DISTRICT BUXAR 7. INDRADEO PAL SON OF SOMARI PAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE PARSA, P.S. DIANARA, DISTRICT ROHTAS --------------------------- Appellants Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR -------------------------- Respondent For the Appellants : Mr. Ambika Bhagat, Advocate Mr. Kamal Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Choubey Jawahar, A.P.P. --------- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH Anjana Prakash, J: The appellants have been convicted u/ss. 365 and 451 I.P.C. and sentenced to a period of three years and one year R.I. respectively by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Buxar in Sessions Trial No.61 of 1991 by a judgment dated 20.5.1994. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 4.4.1990 at about 10.30 P.M. two of his students i.e. P.W.1 and P.W.2 - 2 - were carried away by some unknown persons but were recovered very next morning when the miscreants were chased and caught by the villagers. One of the miscreants, who was caught, is appellant no.7 Indradeo Pal. During trial five witnesses were examined by the prosecution, but only P.W.1 and P.W.2 are relevant here because they are the victims. Both P.W.1 and P.W.2 supported the case of their being lifted from the school and carried away on a boat, but P.W.1 Ranjeet Kumar Rai has identified only appellant no.7 Indradeo Pal in Court, but no effort was made to get Niranjan Pal identified, who was present in Court on that day by the prosecution. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellants that apart from there being some material against the appellant no.7 there is total lack of any evidence with regard to the rest of the appellants. Having gone through the evidence and satisfied myself on this submission, I find that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt with regard to the appellant nos.1 to 6 and, therefore, the order of conviction and sentence passed against the appellant nos.1 to 6 on 20.5.1994 by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Buxar in Sessions Trial No.61 of 1991 is set aside. The appellant nos.1 to 6 are discharged from the liabilities of their respective bail bonds. - 3 - However, the appeal of appellant no.7 is dismissed. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. Patna High Court Dated, 31st March, 2011. NAFR/ Narendra/ ( Anjana Prakash, J. )