Patna High Court
State Of Bihar & Ors vs Surendra Mahto & Anr on 26 July, 2012
Author: Mandhata Singh
Bench: Mandhata Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Govt. Appeal (SJ) No.35 of 1996
(Against the Judgment and Order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ist
Class, Dalsingsarai at Samastipur in G.R. No. 361 of 1991 and Tr. No. 354 of
1996)
===========================================================
The State of Bihar & Ors.
.... .... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Surendra Mahto S/o Raghuni Mahto
2. Upendra Mahto S/o Bhavichhan Mahto
3. Shital Sah S/o Nandan Sah
All R/o Village - Radhauna Tola Mushari, P.S. Vidyapatinagar, Sub-division
and District - Samastipur
.... .... Respondent/s
===========================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. S.N. Prasad, A.P.P.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sachida Nand Chaudhary
Mr. Lovekush Kumar
===========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANDHATA SINGH
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 26-07-2012
Mandhata Singh, J.Respondent no.2, Upendra Mahto has died, so the appeal is abated against him.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the Opposite Parties.
Prosecution case, in brief, is that informant, Ram Binay Choudhary, P.W.4 was returning his home after taking air in his tractor's tyre along with Mahendra Choudhary, P.W.1. They reached near orchard of Krishna Murti Choudhary. He (informant) noticed accused persons standing on road and he stopped his tractor. Of them, Surendra Mahto demanded Rs. 100/- as Rangdari. On objection, there was some altercation. For Patna High Court G. APP. (SJ) No.35 of 1996 dt.26-07-2012 2 Shital Sah, it is alleged that he snatched key of the tractor. Upendra Mahto is alleged for putting pistol on chest of the informant. Witnesses also gathered and due to fear Rs. 80/- was handed over, thereupon Shital Sah returned the key of tractor.
After concluding the trial, all three accused persons-opposite parties no. 2 to 4 are acquitted, validity of which has been challenged through filing this appeal.
In all, five witnesses are examined in the case and they are P.W.1 Mahendra Choudhary, P.W.2 Upendra Kuer, P.W.3 Bishundeo Kuer, P.W.4 Ram Binay Choudhary and P.W.5 Malensh Minj, I.O. of the case.
In this case, P.W.1 to P.W.4 are material witnesses. They have fully corroborated the prosecution case. No discrepancy has appeared in their statement but prosecution case is doubted on the ground that Uday Chandra Choudhary, one of the informant's friend was instrumental to get the case lodged. On this point, Vidypati Nagar P.S. Case No. 51 of 1990 and 52 of 1990 are referred. Vidyapati Nagar P.S. Case No. 51 of 1990 is filed on behalf of Uday Chandra Choudhary, while 52 of 1990 is filed on behalf of one Sunil Kumar Mahto against Uday Chandra Chaudhary and his two brothers in which accused persons have been cited as witnesses.
2 Patna High Court G. APP. (SJ) No.35 of 1996 dt.26-07-2012 3 It is further observation of the trial Court that informant was coming from camp of Uday Chandra Choudhary as his friend and accused persons from the camp of Sunil Kumar Mahto. Other circumstance making the incident suspicious found by the trial Court is that there was no occasion to realize any Rangdari as tractor was not being plied for business purpose rather was coming after taking air in its tyres. Parties are from the same village, so in my view also there appears no mistake committed by the trial Court in doubting the prosecution case to acquit the accused persons no. 2 to 4.
Accordingly, this Government Appeal is
dismissed.
(Mandhata Singh, J.)
Patna High Court,
26th July, 2012,
Shail/-N.A.F.R.
3