Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court - Orders

Uma Kant Khan vs Mali Kant Khan & Ors on 17 August, 2012

Author: Shyam Kishore Sharma

Bench: Shyam Kishore Sharma, Amaresh Kumar Lal

      Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.666 of 2012 (5) dt.17-08-2012                       1




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                    Criminal Appeal (DB) No.666 of 2012
                  ======================================================
                  1. Uma Kant Khan S/O Late Kari Lal Khan R/O Village-Parari,
                     P.S.-Bangaon, Distt.-Saharsa
                                                                     .... .... Appellant/s
                                                     Versus
                  1. Mali Kant Khan S/O Late Sarjun Khan (D.B.) R/O Village-Parari,
                  P.S.-Bangaon, Distt.-Saharasa
                  2. Ghuran Sah S/O Late Baso Sah R/O Village-Parari, P.S.-Bangaon,
                  Distt.-Saharasa
                  3. The State Of Bihar
                                                                    .... .... Respondent/s
                  ======================================================
                  Appearance :
                  For the Appellant/s      : Mr. Atul Kumar Pandey, Advocate
                  For the Respondent/s     : Mr. APP
                  ======================================================
                  CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA
                                                  And
                             HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMARESH KUMAR LAL
                  ORAL ORDER
                  (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHYAM KISHORE SHARMA)
                                              ----------

5   17-08-2012

Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

The case relates to the alleged killing of informant's son. It has been alleged that informant's son was administered poison forcibly in front of Vatika Restaurant. Two accused persons namely, respondent nos. 1 and 2, were put on trial. Charges were framed under Sections 302/34, 328 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and witnesses were examined. The learned Additional Sessions Judge (Mr.Ram Pratap Asthana), Fast Track Court No.III, Saharsa by order dated 11.05.2012 in Sessions Trial Case No. 435 of 2003 arising out of Complaint Case No. 148 of 2001 (Saharsa P.S.Case No. 124 of 1994, Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.666 of 2012 (5) dt.17-08-2012 2 G.R.Case No. 389 of 1998) has acquitted the accused persons. The sole evidence of the prosecution was that the deceased prior to his death has named these two accused who were responsible for causing death.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in view of Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, the statement of the deceased was with regard to cause of death by the accused, so this alone was sufficient for the trial court to presume that the death was on account of administration of poison by the accused.

The trial court has considered the entire evidence and has opined that there is no evidence of administering poison by the accused persons, the alleged eye witness Shyamakant Khan has not seen the deceased in lying condition on the road in front of Vatika Restaurant, there is no evidence to prove that the eye witness Shyamkant Khan, deceased and the accused persons and Suman Chaudhary were present in Vatika Hotel prior to the alleged occurrence, no staff of Hotel including Manager was examined by the prosecution to corroborate the presence of the above named persons in the hotel prior to the occurrence, no independent witness has been examined though offence was committed on busy thorough fare, no one had come to rescue the deceased from being administered poison by both the accused, Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.666 of 2012 (5) dt.17-08-2012 3 both the accused persons are very old and one of the accused has been assessed at 69 years of age and it was not assumed for such an old man to be strong enough to force an young and healthy man to administer poison, the viscera report was also not brought on record and the Investigating Officer finding the case to be false has recommended for prosecution of the informant under Section 182 and 211 of the Indian Penal Code.

In a case of acquittal, this Court can only interfere with the judgment if the same is either perverse or beyond records. We have gone through the judgment and found that the impugned judgment has been passed after considering every circumstances appeared on the record. No inference can be drawn that the death was on account of administering poison. Thus the judgment does not suffer from any illegality or irregularity. The appeal is without merit and is accordingly dismissed.




                                               (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J)


Tahir/-                                          (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J)