Dismissed

Sunil Ram v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC15 Jul 2013CR. APP (DB)/639/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal appeal, the appellants challenged a trial court order granting benefit of doubt to respondents by disbelieving a prosecution case of abduction due to delays in record transmission and lack of corroboration. The High Court declined to interfere.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed and the impugned judgment of the trial court was not interfered with.

Sunil Ram Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Appeal (DB) No.639 of 2013

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Sunil Ram (a witness, son of victim and grand son of informant who is now dead) son of Late Rama Ram, resident of village Hasan Chak, P.S. Athamalgola, district Patna.

¶4

.... .... Appellant/s Versus

¶5

The State of Bihar.

¶6

….. Respondent 1^st set.

¶7

1. Ram Nandan Singh, son of Late Ramashish Singh, resident of village Hasanchak, P.S. Athmalgola, District- Patna.

¶8

1. Paroo Singh, son of Sri Ram Nandan Singh, resident of village Hasanchak, P.S. Athmalgola, District- Patna.

¶9

1. Munna Singh, son of Sri Kamta Singh, resident of Village Hasanchak, P.S.Athmalgola, District- Patna.

¶10

Vijay Singh, son of Sri Ram Nandan Singh, resident of village Hasanchak, P.S. Athmalgola, District- Patna.

¶11

Bajoo Singh, son of Sri Ram Nandan Singh, resident of village Hasanchak, P.S. Athmalgola, District- Patna.

¶12

Binod Singh, son of Sri Ram Nandan Singh, resident of village Hasanchak, P.S. Athmalgola, District- Patna.

¶13

Karoo Singh @ Dinesh Singh, son of Late Rajendra Singh, resident of village Makrapar, P.S. Athmalgola, District- Patna.

¶14

Arun Singh @ Arun Kumar, son of Sri Sitaram Singh, resident of village- Hasanchak, District- Patna.

¶15

Akhilesh Singh, son of Mr. Manohar Singh, resident of village Manraj Singh Ke Tola, P.S. Athmlgola, District- Patna.

¶16

Bigan Singh, son of Late Balam Singh, resident of village Kamrapar, P.S. Athmalgola, District- Patna.

¶17

.... .... Respondent 2^nd set. ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate. Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate. Mr. Ravi Ranjan, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Abhimanyu Sharma, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA)

¶18

2 15-07-2013 Heard.

¶19

Appellant is the son of the victim and grand son

¶20

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.639 of 2013 (2) dt.15-07-2013

¶21

¶22

of the informant of Barh (Athmalgola) P.S. Case No. 427 of 1994 dated 15.11.1994. He has filed this appeal assailing the judgment dated 31.05.2013 passed by the Adhoc Additional District and Sessions Judge-I, Barh (Patna), whereunder prosecution case of abduction of the father of the appellant and son of the informant has been disbelieved on the ground of delay in transmitting the Fardbeyan from Athmalgola out Post to Barh Police Station and then from Barh Police Station to Barh Court as Fardbeyan was recorded at Athmalgola out Post on 14.01.1994 at 21/00 hours then transmitted, reached Barh Police Station on 15.11.1994 at 1 P.M. but from Barh Police Station to Barh Court in the same campus the F.I.R. reached on 17.11.1994.

¶23

Prosecution case has further been disbelieved as informant himself has admitted that he implicated respondent no. 9, Arun Singh, on conjectures and surmises that respondent no. 9 did not raise any alarm while the other respondents who abducted the two victims made good their escape through the field in which respondent no. 9 was working. Another victim, namely, Gauri Das, who returned, examined by the Investigating Officer and included as a witness in the charge sheet was conveniently not produced for his examination in court.

¶24

Prosecution has further been disbelieved on the

¶25

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.639 of 2013 (2) dt.15-07-2013

¶26

¶27

ground that none of the other co-villagers, who were working on the adjoining fields and in whose presence the abduction had taken place came forward to support the prosecution case of abduction. Investigating Officer has also not been examined as according to the learned A.P.P., he was not available for examination, which is evident from order dated 10.12.2012.

¶28

Counsel for the appellant states that in the light of the order dated 10.12.2012, appellant made inquiries and then filed a petition for recall and examination of the Investigating Officer as he was very much available but such petition was rejected under order dated 10.1.2013, against which appellant filed Criminal Miscellaneous petition before this Court but, in the meanwhile, the trial court without waiting for the result of the Criminal Miscellaneous application proceeded to dispose of the trial by the impugned judgment. To us it however appears that the examination of the Investigating Officer could not have explained non examination of material witnesses by the prosecution like Gauri Das and others available at the P.O. at the time of occurrence.

¶29

It further appears from the impugned judgment that the appellant, his father and grand-father were attending to their vegetable crop on the P.O. land which they have taken as

¶30

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.639 of 2013 (2) dt.15-07-2013

¶31

¶32

sharecropper from one Ganpat Singh. According to the trial court, in support of the prosecution case that the occurrence has taken place on the land which was taken by the informant as sharecropper from Ganpat Singh, the examination of Ganpat Singh was necessary to establish in factum of occurrence on the P.O. land.

¶33

For the reasons discussed above, the trial court has chosen to grant benefit of doubt to the respondents. We see no reason to interfere with the grant of benefit of doubt to the respondents. The appeal is dismissed.

¶34

(V.N. Sinha, J)

¶35

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Bhardwaj/-Safik

Sunil Ram v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Ram v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Md. Mansur Alam Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Ramji Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Srikant Singh @ Pintu Singh Vs the State of Bihar

Braj Nandan Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Rajiv Hussain @ Raju Hussain Vs the State of Bihar

Mamta @ Mumtaz Bibi Vs the State of Bihar