Patna High Court dismissed two Criminal Revision petitions as devoid of merit. The court held that evidence only indicated guilt of a deceased accused,absolving others. With no perversity found, impressions under revision were dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL REVISION No.984 of 2016
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2013 Thana- DUMARIAGHAT District- East Champaran
======================================================
Amrendra Singh Son of Anirudh Pratap Singh, resident of Village Rampur Khajuria, Police Station Dumariaghat, District East Champaran Motihari.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
... ... Respondents
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 988 of 2016
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2013 Thana- DUMARIAGHAT District- East Champaran
======================================================
Amrendra Singh Son of Anirudh Pratap Singh, Resident of Village Rampur Khajuria, Police station Dumariaghat, District East Champaran at Motihari.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
... ... Respondents
====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL REVISION No. 984 of 2016) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Yogendra Kr. Singh, APP (In CRIMINAL REVISION No. 988 of 2016) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Akhileshwar Daya, APP
======================================================
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.984 of 2016(4) dt.26-02-2020 2/3
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER
4 26-02-2020
Learned counsel for the petitioner has informed this
Court that Cr. Rev. No. 984 of 2016 has become infructuous as against opposite party no. 2 in view of his death. The revision application, thus, survives against opposite party nos. 3 to 5.
Both the revisions applications have been heard together.
On perusal of the impugned judgment, this Court finds that in Paragraph ‘13’ of the judgment passed in respect of the accused Niraj Singh and Mintu Singh in Trial No. 789 of 2016 the learned trying Magistrate has categorically held as under :-
“13. Considering the evidence adduced and allegation made against accused it is undoubtedly clear that any PW’s examined in this case has not deposed any thing about involvement of these two accused in this very same. The whole scenario is oriented only towards accused Babloo by witnesses. Even though the prime offence against the main accused has not been established by prosecution hence how it is possible against co-accused who has act as conspirator. The informant is also not shown consistancy in his statement and fard bayan. On the other hand all the PW’s are twisting arround the accused Babloo Dubey none has deposited a single piece of evidence against these two accused. There, it is clear that prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charges alleged against accused person beyond all reasonable doubts.”
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.984 of 2016(4) dt.26-02-2020 3/3
In course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that so far the evidences recorded in this trial are concerned those were possibly indicating towards the guilt of Babloo Dubey (since deceased). So far as the other accused persons are concerned no evidence is available on the record to take any contrary view from that of the learned trial court. This Court also understands that in its revisional jurisdiction unless the judgment of the trial court is found to be perversed, no interference is required.
Both the revision applications are, thus, devoid of merit and are dismissed accordingly.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
arvind/ved
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether Criminal Revision petitions challenging acquittal of co-accused due to non- establishment of guilt should be allowed.
Amrendra Singh
The State of Bihar
Bablu Dubey
Mukesh Singh
Shashi Bjhushan Singh
Mahanath Ram Ratan Das
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
