Surendra Singh v. The State of Bihar

2. 3. 4. All are resident of village Kurathol, Gopal Chak, P.S. Phulwarisharif, Distt Patna. The State of Bihar Versus .... .... Appellant/s .... .... Respondent/s Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Rabindra Pd. Singh, Adv. Mr. Rajesh Kr. Divakar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Bipin Kumar, A.P.P. ========================================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA PRAKASH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 17-12-2013 Anjana Prakash, J : The Appellants have been convicted for the offence under Sections 307/34 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years in Sessions Case No. 424 of 1993 by a Judgment and order of conviction dated 30.1.2002 passed by the Presiding Officer, FTC Additional Court-III, (Adhoc District & Sessions Judge), Patna.

The case of the Prosecution according to the Complaint petition of Sheo Kumar is that on 25.8.1992 while he was working at the Pumping set of one Jitender Singh of same village, his cousin Sunil came there and told him that the accused persons are breaking the door of the house of his uncle Laxman Singh. On receiving this 2

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.96 of 2002 dt.17-12-2013 information, he rushed there and found that all the accused persons have surrounded his uncle armed with deadly weapons and then accused Nawal Kishore Singh and Dasrath Singh assaulted the Complainant with iron rod causing injuries over his head, back and left hand, as a result of which, he became unconscious and brought to the Hospital where he was admitted on the same day.

The Complainant remained hospitalized till 19.9.1992 battling death for 25 days. The Complainant stated that even though, the Police Officer of Matihani Police Station had recorded his statement on 27.8.1992, but, he learnt that no case was registered and his information was forwarded to Phulwari Sharif Police Station because of its jurisdiction. It was under such circumstances, that the Complaint petition was filed annexing the copy of Fard-beyan recorded by the Officer-in-Charge of Alamganj Police Station at NMCH on 27.8.1992. He stated that the reason for the occurrence was that some Criminals had uprooted the Mahua Plant of Dasrath Singh from his field and it was suspected that the same had been uprooted by the Informant and, hence, the present occurrence.

During Trial, the Prosecution examined nine witnesses. PW-1 Jadunandan Singh, uncle of the Informant, stated that on the date of occurrence, he saw the Appellants assaulting the Informant. However, he stated that he reached the place of occurrence 10-15 minutes later. 3 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.96 of 2002 dt.17-12-2013

PW-2 Laxman Singh is another uncle of the Informant stated that on information, he reached the place of occurrence and found the Informant injured. He was informed that the accused persons had assaulted his nephew.

PW-3 Brahmdeo Singh, another uncle of the Informant, is hear-say witness.

PW-5 Devnandan Singh has not supported the case of the Prosecution and been declared hostile.

PW-6 Sudharna Devi is the mother of the Informant and is an eye witness account of the occurrence. She also stated that the injured had remained in the Hospital for about one month. She stated that the Police had arrived two days after the occurrence and made enquiries from her.

PW-7, Suraj Narain, has proved the First Information Report (Exbt.-1).

PW-8, Sheo Kumar, is the Informant who stated that on the date of occurrence while he was working at the Boring, he was informed by his cousin Sunil Kumar that the accused persons were breaking the door of his uncle at which he rushed there. When he reached the place of occurrence, persons variously armed had surrounded him as mentioned in the First Information Report assaulted him. He stated that he had become senseless after the 4 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.96 of 2002 dt.17-12-2013 occurrence and had regained his senses after two days upon which he had given his statement.

PW-9 Suryanarayan Singh is the Advocate Clerk who proves the case diary of the present case.

It appears that even though the date of occurrence is

25.8.1992, the Complaint was filed only on 16.9.92. In the Complaint petition, I find mention of the Fard-beyan recorded by Alamganj Plice Station on 27.8.1992 i.e. two days after the alleged occurrence.

The mother of the Informant also states that the Police had conducted an enquiry two days after the occurrence. Even though, apart from the Informant, a number of witnesses have appeared as eye witnesses but none of them allegedly reported the matter to the Police authorities.

The Informant makes out a case that he had remained unconscious for the next two days and reported the matter after regaining his senses on 27.8.1992. Thus, he does not furnish any explanation with regard to the rest of the witnesses. In such circumstances, the belated Complaint is not trustworthy. Moreover, I find that the Investigating Officer has not been examined to explain these discrepancies.

In such circumstances, it would be highly unsafe to maintain the conviction of the Appellant. 5 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.96 of 2002 dt.17-12-2013

The Appellants are discharged from the liabilities of their respective bail bonds. (Anjana Prakash, J.) Patna High Court, Patna. Dated, the 17th December, 2013 NAFR/S.Ali