Patna High Court - Orders
The State Of Bihar Through Collector, ... vs Md. Hira @ Sajjad & Ors. on 18 July, 2014
Author: V.N. Sinha
Bench: V.N. Sinha, Prabhat Kumar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Govt. Appeal (DB) No.6 of 2014
======================================================
The State of Bihar through Collector, Khagaria
.... .... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Md. Hira @ Sajjad son of Md. Hanif
2. Md. Tinku son of Md. Furkan @ Sadik
3. Md. Lalo S/o Matin
4. Md. Wakil Ahamad son of Md. Safi Ahamad
5. Kafil Ahamad son of Md. Safi Ahamad All resident of village - Belaganj,
Police Station ( Gangaour O.P. ) Khagaria, District - Khagaria
.... .... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA)
3 18-07-2014Heard learned counsel for the State in support of this appeal.
2. By the impugned judgment dated 12.09.2013 passed in Sessions Case No. 16 of 2007, 1st Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Khagaria has rejected the prosecution case set out in Khagaria (Gangour) P.S. Case No. 370 of 2006 and thereby acquitted Respondent nos. 1 to 5 of the charge under Sections 302/149 and other allied Sections of the Indian Penal Code, 27 of the Arms Act.
3. It appears, informant and his father, the deceased had gone to market place to purchase vegetable Patna High Court G. APP. (DB) No.6 of 2014 (3) dt.18-07-2014 2/3 and while the two were returning home and reached near Bela Chowk, respondents appeared and assaulted the father of informant with deadly weapon farsa and lathi. After the assault, father of the informant was taken to Sadar Hospital, Khagaria on a cot where the fardbeyan was recorded by the informant, P.W.7 claiming that in his presence, the assault was made by the respondents with deadly weapon.
4. In course of trial, besides the informant P.W.7, his mother P.W.3, Farsana Khatoon and others were examined. In Chief, P.W.3 did support the fact that her son, the informant was present along with his father and had witnesses the assault on the persons of his father by the respondents. In cross-examination, P.W.3 broke down and conceded that deceased was alone at the time of assault and that her son did not witness the assault as her two sons were present in the house at the time of occurrence.
5. Trial court having given good reasons to disbelieve the so called eye-witness, P.W.7, we are not inclined to take a different view in the matter. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. Patna High Court G. APP. (DB) No.6 of 2014 (3) dt.18-07-2014 3/3
6. Having dismissed the appeal on merit, we are of the view that no useful purpose will be served by condoning the delay in filing the appeal. The limitation petition is also dismissed.
(V.N. Sinha, J.) (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) Arjun/-
U T