Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH) Date : 10-09-2021 The appellants have been held guilty in Sessions Trial No. 104 of 2018 arising out of Vijaipur P.S. Case No. 169 Patna High Court D. REF. No.1 of 2020 dt.10-09-2021 of 2017 dated 6th September, 2017 by the learned 4th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gopalganj for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') vide judgment dated 10 th July, 2020. The Trial Court, thus, vide its order passed on 17th August, 2020 awarded death sentence to the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and a fine of Rs. 30,000/-. However, no separate sentence was awarded for the offences punishable under Sections 120B and 201 of the IPC. The death sentence was made subject to confirmation by the High Court.

20. Baliram Kumar (P.W.5), the uncle of the deceased stated in his examination-in-chief that at the time of Patna High Court D. REF. No.1 of 2020 dt.10-09-2021 occurrence, he was at Gopalganj. At about 4:00 PM, he received a call that his nephew Deo Kumar is missing. On receiving the call, he came back to his house and found that his family members were trying to search for the missing child. In course of the search, the dead body of Deo Kumar was found lying in the field near the house of Laddu Shah. The villagers brought the body of the deceased at the door of Sukhi Shah. Thereafter, the police came and recorded the fardbeyan of Vinod Shah, the father of the deceased. Subsequently, the house of the appellant Durgawati Devi was inspected from where a nighty was recovered. On 6th September, 2017, the police prepared the seizure list on which he put his signature. He identified his signature on the seizure list, which was marked as Exhibit-1. On the same day, another seizure list relating to the recovery of the bloodstained soil and a broken knife in two pieces was prepared, which also contains his signature. He identified his signature on the second seizure list, which was marked as Exhibit-8/1. He further stated that on the same day, a third seizure list regarding recovery of a frock, a nighty and a pillow cover from house no. 2 of the appellants was prepared. He identified his signature on the third seizure list, which was marked as Exhibit-8/2. He stated that his nephew was sacrificed, as the daughter-in-law of Patna High Court D. REF. No.1 of 2020 dt.10-09-2021 the appellant Durgawati Devi was not having any children. According to him, the sacrifice of the child was made as part of the practice of sorcery.

32. From the Trial Court's record, it would be evident that the Forensic Science Laboratory (for short 'FSL') report was produced by the investigating officer before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Gopalganj on 25 th Patna High Court D. REF. No.1 of 2020 dt.10-09-2021 January, 2018. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Gopalganj, vide order passed on the same day, directed the FSL report to be kept on record. Accordingly, the FSL report was kept in a sealed cover on the record of the case. Subsequently, the prosecution moved an application on 25th July, 2019 that the FSL report received from Muzaffarpur should be exhibited in the interest of justice. The prosecution also prayed that to prove the document, summons should be issued to Dr. Sunil Kumar, Assistant Director, FSL, Muzaffarpur; and, Suresh Paswan, Deputy Director, FSL, Muzaffarpur, Government of Bihar. The Trial Court allowed the said prayer of the prosecution, vide order dated 6th August, 2019 and summons was directed to be issued to the two officers posted in the FSL, Muzaffarpur.

85. The Trial Court has placed reliance on the seizure lists and the FSL report in inferring the guilt of the appellants.

Patna High Court D. REF. No.1 of 2020 dt.10-09-2021

86. The record would reveal that the FSL report was submitted in the court of ACJM-4, Gopalganj on 25th January, 2018. On the same day, the Investigating Officer gave a written application to the learned ACJM-4, Gopalganj about the production of the sealed report of FSL, which was allowed. From the order sheet dated 6th of August, 2019, it would be evident that the prosecution had moved an application dated 25 th July, 2019 that the forensic report from Muzaffarpur FSL should, in the interest of justice, be exhibited, for which purpose summons should be issued to Dr. Sunil Kumar and his Deputy Suresh Paswan. Accordingly, the summons was issued. However, neither Dr. Sunil Kumar nor Suresh Paswan responded to the summons issued by the court. The record would further reveal that on 9th December, 2019 when the prosecution applied for exhibiting the FSL report, the Trial Court allowed the same. It would also appear from the record that the Investigating Officer (P.W.9) and Jainendra Kumar (P.W.10) were examined before the date on which the FSL report was taken into evidence and marked as an Exhibit. Jainendra Kumar (P.W.10) has exhibited the articles seized by the police and the FSL team, Muzaffarpur, which were examined and described in the FSL report but, apparently, not Patna High Court D. REF. No.1 of 2020 dt.10-09-2021 the report itself.