Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. Md. Alam Khan (in Cr. Appeal DB No. 1004/16)

2. Kama Mahto (app.no.1 in Cr. Appeal DB No. 798/16)

3. Raja Mahto (app.no.1 in Cr. Appeal DB No. 964/16)

4. Bhulo Mahto @ Bulo Mahto (app.2 in Cr. App. DB No. 798/16)

5. Ram Mahto (app.no.3 in Cr. Appeal DB No. 798/16)

6. Jagdish Chaudhary (app.no.2 in Cr. Appeal DB No. 964/16)

7. Matru Mahto (app.no.4 in Cr. Appeal DB No. 798/16) and

8. Chhote Lal Sah (app.no.3 in Cr. Appeal DB No. 964/16) were held guilty and convicted for offence under Sections 302/34 of the I.P.C.. However, one of the accused namely Mukti Lal Mahto was acquitted from the charges and subsequently by order of sentence dated 26-07-2016, all the aforesaid convicted eight appellants were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 5,000/- (five thousand) each and in default, they were directed to undergo simple imprisonment for six months additionally. So far as three appellants i.e. Bimal Mahto (in Cr. Appeal DB No. 1034/16), Anandi Mahto (in Cr. Appeal DB No. 925/16) and Domi Mahto (in Cr. Appeal DB No. 1009/16) in Sessions Trial No. 94(S) of 1995 are concerned, they surrendered on 08-08-2016 and taken into custody. Thereafter, on Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1004 of 2016 dt. 16-02-2018 27-08-2016, they were held guilty and convicted for offence under Sections 302/34 of the I.P.C. and by order of sentence dated 29-08-2016, they were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 5,000/- (five thousand) each and in default, additionally they were directed to undergo simple imprisonment for six months.

5. On the basis of said fardbeyan, a formal F.I.R. was drawn, vide Udakishanganj (Bihariganj) P.S. Case No. 83 of 1993, for offence under Sections 302/34 of the I.P.C. on Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1004 of 2016 dt. 16-02-2018 23-06-1993 at 10:30 P.M. against following accused persons:-

Sl. Name of the appellant Cr.Appeal (DB) No.
1. Bhulo Mahto @ Bulo Mahto App.2 in 798/16

6. After registering F.I.R., police investigated the case and thereafter, on 31-08-93 chargesheet was submitted against all the F.I.R. named accused persons showing two accused namely Maheshwar Mahto and Arun Mahto as absconder. After submission of chargesheet, on 16-09-93 the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of offence and after completion of formality under Section 207 of the Cr.P.C., order of commitment was passed on 05-08-95. It was received in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Madhepura on 14-08-95 and it was numbered as Sessions Trial No. 94 of 1995. In the case, since there were Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1004 of 2016 dt. 16-02-2018 number of accused persons, framing of charge was delayed and finally, on 20-06-2000, charge was jointly framed against all the accused persons for offence under Sections 302/34 of the I.P.C., which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In the case, initially, to prove its case, on behalf of the prosecution six witnesses were examined, namely;

7. Before proceeding further, it is necessary to incorporate certain facts, which have been noticed from the Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1004 of 2016 dt. 16-02-2018 ordersheet of the court below. In the case after the occurrence, formal F.I.R. was lodged on 23-06-93 at 10:30 PM, vide Udakishunganj (Bihariganj) P.S. Case No. 83 of 1993, against 14 accused persons. The F.I.R. was received in the court of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura on 25-06-1993. At the same time, the police had produced one of the accused Matru Mahto (appellant no. 4 in Cr.Appeal DB No. 798/16), who was remanded to judicial custody. On 05-07-93, a prayer was made by the investigating agency for issuance of processes against accused persons and thereafter, on the next date i.e. on 06-07-93, 1. Bhulo Mahto @ Bulo Mahto (appellant no. 2 in Cr.Appeal DB No. 798/16), 2. Md. Alam Khan (appellant in Cr.Appeal DB No. 1004/16), 3. Jagdish Chaudhary (appellant no. 2 in Cr.Appeal DB No. 964/16), 4. Ram Mahto (appellant no. 3 in Cr.Appeal DB No. 798/16), 5. Maheshwar Mahto (who was shown absconder in the chargesheet), 6. Domi Mahto (appellant in Cr.Appeal DB No. 1009/16) and 7. Anandi Mahto (appellant no. 4 in Cr.Appeal DB No. 925/16) surrendered and they were remanded to the judicial custody. On 07-07-93, Kamo Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1004 of 2016 dt. 16-02-2018 Mahto (appellant no. 1 in Cr.Appeal DB No. 798/16) and Rajo Mahto (appellant no. 1 in Cr.Appeal DB No. 964/16) surrendered. Subsequently, on two dates i.e. on 03-08-93 and 16-08-93 accused Arun Mahto, who was shown as absconder in the chargesheet, and Chhote Lal Sah (appellant no. 3 in Cr.Appeal DB No. 964/16) respectively surrendered and they were remanded to the judicial custody. After completion of appearance and all formalities, by order dated 05-08-95, the learned court below directed for committal of the case, which was received in the court of learned Sessions Judge on 14-08-95 and it was numbered as Sessions Trial No. 94 of 1995. In the case, charges were framed against all accused persons on 20-06-2000 for offence under Sections 302/34 of the I.P.C. Thereafter, first prosecution witness i.e. Fucho Mahto (P.W.1) was examined on 05-08-00 and without any plausible reasons, recording of evidence was delayed since prosecution had not produced witnesses regularly. However, after about lapse of more than nine years, evidence of P.W.6 Ram Khelawan Mahto remained inconclusive. Thereafter, again trial was delayed and on number of dates, no witness was produced. Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1004 of 2016 dt. 16-02-2018 Thereafter, by order dated 17-06-2010, the learned Trial Judge directed for issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest for securing evidence of informant and investigating officer, which was issued on 02-07-2010. However, for about one year from the prosecution side, no step was taken for producing witnesses. Order dated 22-07-2011 of learned Trial Judge reflects the lethargic approach of the prosecution. The learned Trial Judge recorded in the ordersheet that repeatedly after issuance of summons, non- bailable warrant of arrest against witnesses, prosecution failed to produce witnesses and as such, as a last indulgence, the matter was deferred. However, on the same date, the learned Trial Judge marked the post-mortem examination report and inquest report, which were marked as Ext. 2 and 2/A respectively, however; those documents were exhibited with objection. Subsequently, on 01.12.11, accused persons were directed to remain present physically in court for recording statement and date was fixed to 15-12-11, on which, statement under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. was recorded in respect of accused Chhote Lal Sah (App.3 in Cr.Appeal DB No. 964/16), Bhulo Mahto @ Bulo Mahto Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1004 of 2016 dt. 16-02-2018 (App.2 in Cr.Appeal DB No. 798/16), Md. Alam Khan (App. in Cr.Appeal DB No. 1004/16) and Bimal Mahto (App. in Cr.Appeal DB No. 1034/16) and finally, up-to 02- 03-2012, statement under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. of remaining all the accused persons was recorded. Only one accused did not appear and as such, by order dated 02-07-2012, the bail-bond of Arun Mahto (who was shown as absconder in the chargesheet) was cancelled and non- bailable warrant of arrest was issued against him. Thereafter, on one reason or the other, the matter was again deferred and thereafter, the case was fixed for defence evidence and since no defence witness was produced, the case was closed and by order dated 09-01-2015, the case was directed to be posted 'for argument'. On 22-01-2015, after hearing argument, judgment was reserved, however; subsequently the matter was again posted for argument and finally, on 15-04-2015, the case was re-opened by exercising its power under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. The learned Trial Judge directed to issue letter to the Superintendent of Police for production of investigating officer, doctor and informant and case was fixed for evidence. Since no witnesses were Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1004 of 2016 dt. 16-02-2018 produced on 24-06-15, non-bailable warrant of arrest was directed to be issued against the witness Ram Khelawan Mahto (P.W.6), whose cross-examination was inconclusive and other witnesses. On 01-07-2015, the informant Kaushal Kishore Mahto (C.W.1) appeared, he was examined and finally, on 03-07-2015, after cross-examination, he was discharged. Thereafter, C.W.2 Birodhia Devi (daughter of deceased and sister of the informant) and C.W.3 Dr. Jang Bahadur Singh, who conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased, after evidence, were discharged on 05-08-2015 and 11-08-2015 respectively. Again non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued for remaining witnesses. Since after issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest, no response was coming from the prosecution or the Superintendent of Police, as per order of the Presiding Officer, letter was sent to the Inspector General of Police, Darbhanga for evidence of investigating officer, however; neither the investigating officer appeared nor any response was received. In the meanwhile, the case proceeded against nine accused persons and on 30-05-2016, again statement of nine accused persons under Section 313 Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.1004 of 2016 dt. 16-02-2018 of the Cr.P.C. was recorded and case was fixed for defence evidence. Thereafter, by 22-06-2016, after examination of three defence witnesses, namely; Gopal Mishra (D.W.1), Upendra Mahto (D.W.2) and Ram Mahto (D.W.3), the defence evidence was closed and the case was fixed for argument, which was concluded and finally, on 23-07-2016, eight aforesaid appellants were held guilty and convicted, whereas, one accused namely Mukti Lal Mahto was acquitted. On 26-07-2016, order of sentence was passed in respect of convicted eight accused persons, who are appellants.