Kalanand Lahotiya and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.363 of 2013

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2005 Thana- PRATAPGANJ District- Supaul

¶3

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

¶4

Kalanand Lahotiya, S/o Late Luran Lahotiya Resident Of Village Pratapganj, P.S. Pratapganj, District Supaul.

¶5

Khelanand Lahotiya, S/o Late Luran Lahotiya Resident Of Village Pratapganj, P.S. Pratapganj, District Supaul.

¶6

Shambhu Lahotiya S/o Late Luran Lahotiya Resident Of Village Pratapganj, P.S. Pratapganj, District Supaul.

¶7

Roshan Lahotiya S/o Kalanand Lahotiya Resident Of Village Pratapganj, P.S. Pratapganj, District Supaul.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Respondent/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Amarnath Singh, Advocate Mr. Kamal Kishore Singh, Advocate Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. A.M.P. Mehta, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

¶13

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶14

Date: 03-01-2025

¶15

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted

¶16

that appeal against Appellant No.2, namely, Khelanand Lahotiya may be abated, since, he has already died during pendency of the present appeal.

¶17

Considering the submissions of the learned

¶18

counsel for the appellants, the appeal against Appellant No.2,

¶19

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 2/24

¶20

namely, Khelanand Lahotiya is abated.

¶21

Heard Mr. Amarnath Singh, Mr. Kamal Kishore

¶22

Singh and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned counsels for the appellants and Mr. A.M.P. Mehta, learned APP for the State.

¶23

The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 15.04.2013 passed in Session Case No. 284 of 2006 by the Learned Adhoc Additional District and Sessions Judge-III, Supaul by which the appellants have been convicted and sentenced for imprisonment for a period of five years and fine of Rs. 2000/- on each of the appellant and in case of default in depositing fine, they shall be sentenced to further imprisonment for a period of one month each.

¶24

That the facts leading to the present case are that the informant Ramji Lahotia stated in his fardbeyan that on 17.04.2005, at around 10AM his son, Vedanand Lahotia was going to plough his field when the accused-appellants Kalanand Lahotia, Shambhu Lahotia, Roshan Lahotia and Khelanand Lahotia came there and started hitting him with lathis, farsa and bhala and thereafter stopped him from ploughing the field. The informant’s son somehow managed to reach home and narrated the incident to the informant. The informant and his sons, the injured Vedanand Lahotia and his other sons Sudhanand Lahotia

¶25

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 3/24

¶26

and Sadanand Lahotia were going to the field and on the way on the corner of the pacca road near Jalebi Gaanch the accused Kalanand Lahotia, Shambhu Lahotia, Roshan Lahotia, Khelanand Lahotia, Brahmadev Lahotia, Sakaldev Lahotia, Bindeshwari Lahotia, Ramanand Lahotia, Siyaram Banebar and Bindeshwari Banebar met them and started hitting the informant and his sons with lathis, farsa and bhala. The accused Kalanand Lahotia hit the informant on his head with a farsa with an intention to kill him following which the informant fell on the ground and Khelanand Lahotia hit him with lathi. The other accused Bindeshwari Lahotia and Roshan Lahotia hit the informant’s son Sudanand Lahotia with a bhala on his left leg and head. One of the accused Shambhu Lahotia took away an HMT Janta watch from the hand of Sudanand Lahotia. On hearing the noise other villagers such as Mahendra Lahotia and G. Lahotia came to the place of incident in order to stop the assault.

¶27

Based on this the Officer in charge of Chhatapur Police Station recorded the formal statement of the informant and registered the case. After investigation the chargesheet was submitted before the learned S.D.J.M Birpur who after taking cognizance of the case, committed the case to the court of

¶28

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 4/24

¶29

District and Sessions Judge.

¶30

The prosecution had examined a total of 12 witnesses to substantiate the charges against the appellants, who were- PW-1 Sitaram Banebar, PW-2 Nunu Lahotia, PW-3 Vijay Lahotia, PW-4 Dr. Anzar Ahmad, PW-5 Fhunnu Lahotia, PW-6 Kashinand Lahotia, PW-7 Ramji Lahotia, PW-8 Sudhanand Lahotia, PW-9 Sadanand Lahotia, PW-10 Vedanand Lahotia, PW-11 Ramkrishnan Paswan, PW–12 Dr. Avinash Kumar Karn.

¶31

The prosecution had also presented certain documents for exhibition which are, Exhibit 1- Injury report of Sudhanand Lahotia, Exhibit 1/1- Injury report of Ramji Lahotia, Exhibit 1/1- Injury report of Sadanand Lahotia. Exhibit 2 is the signature of the informant on the fardbeyan, Exhibit 3 is the signature on the Endorsement note on the fardbeyan .Exhibit 4 is the FIR and Exhibit 5 is the X-ray report of Ramji Lahotia. Defence examined two witnesses, namely, (i) Khela Nand Lahotia and (ii) Kalanand Lahotia.

¶32

In the instant case, PW's- 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 have been declared hostile by the prosecution.

¶33

PW-4, Dr. Anzar Ahmad is the doctor who examined the victims in the instant case. In his examination-inchief he stated that on 17.04.2005 he was posted as medical

¶34

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 5/24

¶35

officer at Simrahi P.H.C. On that date he examined Sudhanand Lahotiya s/o Ramjee Lahotiya of village Louhatiya, Tola Pratapganj, P.S Pratapganj, District- Supaul at 2.40 P.M and found the following injuries:

¶36

1. Lacerated wound 1 ½ X ¼ skin deep in left parital region of skull

¶37

2. Lacerated wound 2 ¼ X ¼ deep over left parital region of skull

¶38

3. Incised wound ½ X ½ X 1 ¼ deep over upper part of the left leg laterally

¶39

4. Bruise with swelling 3’ X 1’ X ½’on right

¶40

leg.

¶41

Age of injuries with in 12 hours,

¶42

Weapons used in Injury no. 2 and 4 are hard and blunt substances while Injury no. 4 is caused by a sharp cutting weapon.

¶43

Nature- Injury no. 1,2,3 are simple

¶44

Injury no. 4 opinion reserved, X- Ray advised

¶45

M.I.- old fear of wound on right arm.

¶46

10.i. On the same day the injured Ramjee Lahotiya

¶47

was examined at 2.30 P.M and following injuries were found on his person:

¶48

1. Lacerated wound 2'' x ½'' skin deep over in Right parietal region posteriorly

¶49

2. Bruise with swelling 3’ X 1’ X 1 'over left leg laterally.

¶50

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 6/24

¶51

3. Bruise with swelling 2 ½ x l’ x ½’ over left thigh laterally.

¶52

4. Bruise with swelling 2 ½’ x 1’ X ½’ over left am laterally

¶53

5. Bruise with swelling 2 ½’ x ½ ’ X ½’ over right arm laterally. Age of injuries- within 12 hours Weapon- Hard and blunt substance Nature- Injury no. 2,3,4 and 5 are simple; opinion reserved, X- Ray advised

¶54

M.I one mole over Right lower eye lid

¶55

10.ii. On that day injured Bedanand was examined

¶56

at 2.50 pm and the following injury were found on his person:

¶57

1. Lacerated wound 2 ½’ x ½ ' skin deep over left parietal region of skull

¶58

2. Lacerated wound 2''x ¼ '' skin deep over right parietal region of skull

¶59

3. Bruise with swelling 2’x ½’x ½’ over right antelataint laterally 4. Bruise with swelling 2’x ½’x ⅙ ’over right scapular region.

¶60

5. Bruise with swelling 1 ½ ’½’x ⅙ ’ over left scapular region.

¶61

Age of injuries: 12 hours

¶62

Weapon- Hard and blunt substances Nature- All injuries are simple in nature

¶63

M. I - old sear marks w ound over left hand and sear mark of wound over left knee Joint medically.

¶64

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 7/24

¶65

10.iii. On the same date at 2.45 pm the injured Sadanand was examined and found following injuries on his

¶66

person:

¶67

Bruise with swelling 2’x ½’x ⅙ ’over right wrist joint. Bruise with swelling 1 ½’x ½’x ⅙ ’ over right leg laterally Age of injury within 12 hours weapon- Hard and Blunt substances Nature- All injuries are simple in Nature M2 - old sear of wound over right leg. Witness has confirmed his signature and writing as beared on the all reports of injury marked as ext 1,/1, 1/2 and 1/I. 3

¶68

Only the injury caused on the leg of Sudhanand

¶69

Lahotia was caused by a sharp weapon and was grievous in nature. Rest all the injuries were simple in nature.

¶70

PW-7, Ramji Lahotia, the informant stated in his examination-in-chief that the incident took place 2-3 years ago at around 10 AM in the morning. He was returning home after defecating outside when the accused Kalanand Lahotia, Shambhu Lahotia, Roshan Lahotia, Khelanand Lahotia, Brahmadev Lahotia, Sakaldev Lahotia, Bindeshwari Lahotia, Ramanand Lahotia, Siyaram Banebar and Bindeshwari Banebar were siting near his house and on seeing him, they started

¶71

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 8/24

¶72

beating him. Kalanand hit him with a farsa on his head which resulted in cuts on his head and started bleeding. Shambhu hit his right hand with a bhaala and Khelanand hit his left hand near the elbow with a knife which further resulted in blood injuries. He stated that he got unconscious after the assault. Sudhanand, Vedanand, Sadanand, who had come to save him were also beaten by the accused persons. They were beaten with a lathi . Kalanand hit the head of Vedanand with a farsa , due to which his head got cut and started bleeding. Phulo Lohatia hit Vedanand with a lathi on his hands and legs . Sudhanand, his son, was hit by Kalanand with a farsa on the head which resulted in bleeding. Rest of the people assaulted him with lathis . Bauni Lohatia assaulted Sadanand with his hands. He further stated that the incident occurred due to a land dispute between the parties.

¶73

11.i. In his cross-examination, PW-7 stated that the accused persons were his cognates and there was a dispute between both parties regarding a piece of land. He stated that he could not tell the Khata no., Khesra (sale deed) or boundary of the disputed land. He stated that he did not remember if he gave his statement to the police on the day of incidence. He further stated that his left foot was fractured and his right hand was

¶74

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 9/24

¶75

injured by the hit of bhaala. The right side of his head was injured by the farsa . He also stated the place of occurrence of the incident was Dhaar, which was at a distance of half kilometres south to his house.

¶76

PW-8, Sudhanand Lahotia, stated in his examination-in-chief that the incident took place 2 years ago on Sunday at around 10 AM. He did not remember the date. He was at his house at the time of occurrence of incident. His brother Vedanand Lahotiya was ploughing his field which was located close to Lohapul. At that time Kalanand Lahotiya, Khelanand Lahotiya, Shambhu Lahotiya, Raushan Lahotiya, Siyaram Banewar, Bindeshwar Banewar, Phulo Lahotiya, Bindeshwari Lahotiya, Ramanand Lahotiya assaulted Vedanand with lathis and farsas . Vedanand fled from the field and came home. PW-8 along with Sadanand Lahotiya and Ramjee Lahotiya were on their way to the field where the assault took place. On the way when they reached near the road the above mentioned people started assaulting and beating them with lathis and farsas . PW-8 stated that he was hit by a farsa at two places on his head by Khelanand while Shambhu and Raushan hit him with a bhala on his right leg and Kalanand hit him with lathi on his right hand and all the other accused beat him with

¶77

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 10/24

¶78

lathis . All of the accused assaulted Vedanand with lathis , farsa , bhala as a result of which he got injury on his head, leg, back and other body parts. Sadanand was also assaulted by the accused with lathis , farsa and bhala as a result of which he got injury on his head and hands. Ramji Lahotiya was assaulted with lathis , farsa and bhala by Kalanand, Shambhu, Khelanand, Raushan, Phulo, Bindeshwari, Ramanand, Siyaram, Bindeshwar, as a result of which he got injury on his head, chest, leg, back.

¶79

12.i. In his cross-examination he stated that when Vedanand came home from the field, he was at his house along with his father Ramji Lahotiya and brother Sadanand Lahotiya. He stated that Vedanand got unconsious after reaching home and regained senses after two - three days. The field where Vedanand was assaulted was located at a distance of 1/2 (0.5) Kilometer from their home in the west direction. He also stated that apart from Vedanand and Ramji Lahotia, no other family member was present at the place of occurrence. PW-8 stated that he tried to escape the assault by running away but he was caught by the accused and assaulted after which he was unconsious. He was hit by a bhala on his leg below the knees and by sticks on his head which led to bleeding following which he was

¶80

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 11/24

¶81

unconsious.

¶82

PW-9, Sadanand Lahotia stated in his examination-in-chief that the incident took place on 17.04.2005 at around 10 AM when he was informed that his brother Vedanand was assaulted by the accused. On hearing this, he along with his father Ramji Lahotia and brother Sudhanand Lahotia proceeded towards the field but they met Vedanand on the crossing near Jalebi Gaanch. Vedanand was telling them about the assault he faced at the field when the accused Bindeshwari Lahotia, Siyaram Banewar and Bindeshwar Banesar reached the crossing and started assaulting his father and him with lathis, bhala and farsa . Bindeshwari Lahotia hit him on his head with a lathi which resulted in head injury. Khelanand hit him with a lathi on his right wrist. Sudhanand was attacked on his head by Shambu with a lathi which resulted in head injuries and Sudhanand was beaten by sticks on his legs by Roshan and Shambhu.

¶83

13.i. In his cross-examination PW-9 stated that he when he reached the place of occurrence his father had already been struck with lathi and he was already bleeding from the injuries. He also stated that he stayed on the place of occurrence i.e. Jalebi Ganch.

¶84

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 12/24

¶85

PW-10, Vedanand Lahotia stated in his examination-in-chief that the occurrence took place about two years ago in the month of Vaisakh as per Hindu calendar and the day was Sunday. The time was about 10 o'clock in the morning. He was ploughing his field at that time when Khelanand Lohatiya, Shambhu Lauhatia, Kalanand Lauhatia and Roshan Lauhatia all four arrived with lathis, farsa and bhala and forbade him from ploughing the field. After an altercation about the ridge in the land Shambhu and Khelanand hit his head with lathi as a result of which his head got severely injured from both sides. Kalanand Lauhatia hit him on back side of his waist with a lathi and Roshan Lauhatia hit his knee with a lathi as a result of which he got unconscious. After being assaulted, he somehow managed to reach near Jalebi Gaach mor where he met his family members who had arrived there from home. He stated that he met his father Ramji Lauhatia and brothers Sudhanand and Sadanand near Jalebi Gaanch. He told him about the occurrence which had taken place with him at the field. Thereafter, Kalanand Lauhatia, Khelanand Lauhatia, Shambhu Lauhatia, Roshan Lauhatia, Bindeshwar Banewar, Siyaram Banewar, Bauni Lauhatia @ Bheem Lauhatia all these people arrived near the turning and assaulted him. His father

¶86

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 13/24

¶87

and his brothers Sadanand and Sudhanand. Shambhu Lauhatia assaulted his father Ramji Lauhatia with a lathi and severely injured his head, and Khelanand hit his father's head with a farsa due to which his head got severely injured from both sides. Roshan Lauhatia assaulted his brother Sudhanand with a farsa due to which his head got severely injured. Kalanand made an assault on his brother Sadanand's hands and head by a stick. He said that the Police recorded the statement of his father in Simrahi hospital itself, on the basis of which the case got registered.

¶88

14.i. In his cross-examination, PW-10 stated that his statement was not recorded before the police. He then stated that the police recorded his statement at Simrahi Hospital also three days after the occurrence. He remained admitted in Simrahi Hospital for about ten days, and after that the police arrested him. He stated that after coming from the field (the spot of occurrence) after the assault when he reached Jalebi Gaach , he got unconscious while narrating the incidence of occurrence to his father. At that instance, apart from his father, both his brothers namely Sadanand and Sudhanand also arrived there. He also stated that he regained his consciousness in the hospital. He was not aware of who arrived at Jalebi Gaach while he was

¶89

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 14/24

¶90

unconscious. He stated that the accused Kalanand etc. was his maternal uncle in reaction and that there was a dispute in connection with the field between the parties. He stated that in the field he was alone and two people had farsa in their hands. One person namely Kalanand Lauhatia had a bhala in his hands. He was severely injured on his head due to the assault by farsa. He also stated that after assaulting him the accused left the spot. Once he left the field, he was not assaulted after that.

¶91

PW-11, Ramkrishna Paswan, was the Investigating Officer in the instant case. In his examination-inchief he stated that he inspected the place of occurrence on 19.04.2005 . There were two places of occurrences- one was the field about two kilometers south from the pacca road from Pratapganj market, and towards the east, by the road leading to Sukhanagar, there were plots of the complainant and the accused, in which there was field of the accused. The second place of occurrence was where fighting took place near Jalebi Gaanch. The accused Shambhu Lahotiya was returning home after ploughing his field. In the meantime, the fighting took place on this very road leading to Sukhanagar, the boundary of which is - to the east was Ram Prasad Lahotiya's jute field, to the west was Bhuvan Lahotiya's jute field and to the north there

¶92

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 15/24

¶93

was the road leading to Sukhanagar, and to the south the pacca road leading to Pratapganj. He recorded the statement of the witness Fulu Lahotiya s/o Awadh Lahotiya r/o Pratapganj PS, Distt- Supaul, in which he fully corroborated the incident and said that fighting took place between Shambhu Lahotiya, Khelanand Lahotiya, Kalanand Lahotiya and Ramji Lahotiya, Sadanand Lahotiya, Vidyanand Lahotiya, Sudhanand Lahotiya. Raushan Lahotia brought water to the place of occurrence after the incident, and Sakaldeo Lahotiya, Brahmdeo Lahotiya were not at the place of incident at the time of occurrence. They arrived after the assault took place and forbade them from fighting.

¶94

15.i. He recorded the statement of the witness Kasind Lahotiya who fully corroborated the incident and said that exchange of verbal abuse took place with Fulo Lahotiya, Ramanand Lahotiya, Siyaram Banewar, Bindeshwari Banewar, and Sakaldeo Lahotiya and Brahmdeo Lahotiya were not involved in the incident. He recorded the statement of the witness Nuno Lahotiya who also corroborated the incident and said that Sakaldeo Lahotiya and Brahmdeo Lahotiya were not involved in the incident and he also told that fighting occurred between Shambhu Lahotiya, Khelanand Lahotiya, Kalanand

¶95

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 16/24

¶96

Lahotiya, Raushan Lahotiya and Ramji Lahotiya, Vedanand Lahotiya, Sudhanand Lahotiya. No fight occurred between Bindeshwari Lahotiya, Fulo Lahotiya, Ramanand Lahotiya, Siyaram Banewar, Bindeshwari Banewar. Only heated argument occurred. He recorded the statement of the witness Vijay Lahotiya s/o late Khikhar Lahotiya, in which he stated that the fighting happened on the issue of ploughing the field in which Shambhu Lahotiya, Khelanand Lahotiya, Kalanand Lahotiya and Raushan Lahotiya were at the place of incident. There was exchange of words with Bindeshwari Lahotiya, Fulo Lahotiya, Ramanand Lahotiya, and at the time of incident, Sakaldeo Lahotiya and Brahmdeo Lahotiya were not present. He recorded the statement of the witness Sitaram Banewar s/o late Manik Banewar, who said that the fighting took place during the ploughing of the field and breaking of the ridge. The fighting took place between the complainant Ramji Lahotiya, Sadanand Lahotiya, Vedanand Lahotiya, Sudhanand Lahotiya and the accused Shambhu Lahotiya, Khelanand Lahotiya, Kalanand Lahotiya and Raushan Lahotiya. Sakaldeo Lahotiya and Brahmdeo Lahotiya forbade both the parties to fight. He recorded the statements of injured Sudhanand Lahotiya, Sadanand Lahotiya, and Vedanand Lahotiya. He recorded the

¶97

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 17/24

¶98

statement of the informant Ramji Lahotiya when he regained his consciousness on 18.04.2005. After the investigation, obtaining sufficient evidence, as per order of Police Inspector. He submitted Chargesheet No. 41 of 2005 dated 29.08.2005 to the court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Birpur under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307 and 379 Indian Penal Code. In the investigation and stated that he found the charge u/s 307 Indian Penal Code against the accused to be true, then only he submitted the chargesheet.

¶99

15.ii. In his cross-examination he stated that after taking over the charge of investigation, he did not mention in the case diary at which date and time he left police station for investigation. Where and at what time he recorded the restatement of the complainant is also not written in the case diary. He met the injured persons of this case at the hospital. The time of meeting is mentioned in Para No. 2 in the case diary. He has recorded the statement and fardbeyan of the complainant Ramji.

¶100

PW-12, Dr. Avinash Kumar stated in his examination-in-chief that he examined two victims, i.e. Ramjee Lahotia and Sudhanand Lahotia. Sudhanand Lahotia aged about 30 years, S/o Sri Ramjee Lahotia at P.S. Pratapganj, District

¶101

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 18/24

¶102

Supaul was seen and treated by C.M.O., I/c. Simrahi PHC Supaul on 17.04.2005 vide registration no. 925 and referred to Sadar Hospital Saharsa on 2^nd May, 2005 which was admitted at Sadar Hospital Saharsa on 7^th May, 2005 vide registration no. MSW 432. He was having the following finding which was observed during the treatment at Sadar Hospital, Saharsa.

¶103

“(i) Old healed injury more than 15 days of the scalp. Advised X-Ray skull AP/Lateral (Anterior Posterior / Lateral) vide x-Ray Plat No. 253145, plate was torn NAD (No abnormality detected)

¶104

(ii) Tenderness in left lower leg, advised x-Ray of left lower leg x-Ray Plate No.258 dated 17.05.2005 and there was no sign of fracture.

¶105

This opinion of injury report is being written by me and also signed by me which I recognized and marked at Ext.5.”

¶106

2. Patient Ramjee Lahotia, aged about 70 years, S/o Late Bhallu Lahotia at P.S. Pratapganj, District Supaul was seen by M.O. I/c. Simrahi PHC District – Supaul on 17.04.2005 vide registration no.924 and referred to Sadar Hospital Saharsa on 07.05.2005. The following findings were found:

¶107

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 19/24

¶108

“Pain in left lower leg.

¶109

Patient was in plaster slab, plaster slab removed and examined and did the x-Ray. check the x-Ray of left leg vide X-ray Plate No.244 dated 14.05.2005 and torn no abnormality.

¶110

This opinion of injury report is being written by me and also signed by me which I recognized and marked at Ext.5/1.

¶111

(3) Both the x-rays were done at Sadar Hospital Saharsa and there are five x-ray plates of Sudhanand Lahotia and one x-ray plate in respect of Ramjee Lahotia.”

¶112

(4) In his cross-examination he stated that he had not treated any grievous injury on the persons of both the injured Sudhanand and Ramjee Lahotia during his examination.

¶113

Learned counsel for the appellants at the outset,

¶114

submits that the trial Court erred in convicting the appellants for the charges leveled against them in spite of having no materials available on record, except for the oral evidence of the prosecution witnesses. The Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the witnesses who were examined were related to

¶115

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 20/24

¶116

the victims and all the independent witnesses were declared hostile apart from PW-4 and 12 who were the examining doctors and PW-10, who was the Investigating Officer. The counsel also submitted that none of the injuries alleged to have been caused have been proved in the injury report submitted by the doctors. Further, the Investigating Officer stated that the place of the occurrence and the allegation of assault has not been proved and that there is a pending litigation between the parties in relation to their land dispute. Hence, the prosecution has failed to prove their case beyond all reasonable doubts and despite this the trial Court has convicted them, therefore, they have prayed to set aside the conviction and sentence of the trial Court and to acquit the accused by extending to them the benefit of doubt.

¶117

On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed this appeal and submits that there is direct allegation against the present appellants, for assaulting the informant and his sons. In view of the aforesaid statements and the evidence on record, learned trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants and the present appeal should not be entertained.

¶118

At this stage, I would like to appreciate the relevant extract of entire evidence led by the prosecution and

¶119

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 21/24

¶120

defence before the Trial Court.

¶121

Having deeply studied and scrutinized the facts

¶122

of the case and the material on record, it is pertinent to note that firstly, the allegation of theft of one HMT watch as mentioned in the fardbeyan has not been proved. Further, there are material inconsistencies in the statements of the prosecution witnesses PW-10, who is the son of the informant failed to prove the allegation of theft of his watch as alleged in the fardbeyan. Further the injuries as stated by the injured witnesses were not proved, which was allegedly caused by the use of sharp weapons as all the injuries were caused by hard and blunt substances upon all the injured persons except injury no.3 of Sudhanand Lahotia and all the injuries are simple in nature as evidenced in the injury reports. There have also been inconsistencies in the statement of the informant PW-7 as given in the fardbeyan and his deposition. The informant PW-7 stated in his examination-in-chief in Para 2 that he was coming to his home after defecating when the accused were waiting near his house and they started assaulting him there. However, in the fardbeyan he stated that he was informed that his son Vedanand was being assaulted in the field and when he was going to the field with his sons, they were assaulted near the mor around

¶123

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 22/24

¶124

Jalebi Gaanch. It is also found that the injuries as alleged by him have not been proven as evidenced by the injury report of the doctors. In his cross-examination in Para 14 PW-7 alleged that he fractured his left leg and that it was plastered but this fact again is not corroborated by any evidence.

¶125

PW-8 stated in Para 6 of his cross-examination that Vedanand was injured when he reached home after the assault on the field and he got unconscious at home and therafter gained consciousness after 2-3 days. In Para 11 of his cross-examination he also states that he got unconscious from the assault. Contrary to this, PW-9 stated in his examination-inchief that he, his father and brother met Vedanand at the mor near Jalebi Gaanch. He also states that there were 2-4 people at the place of incident who witnessed the incident but none of the persons were examined in the instant case. This shows that the prosecution witnesses are not consistent with the facts of the case. PW-10 stated in Para 1 of his examination-in-chief that he was assaulted with lathis on the field but in Para 9 of his crossexamination he first stated that he was hit by a farsa on his head but then goes on to say he was not hit by a farsa .

¶126

It is seen that the manner of assault has not been proven and there are material inconsistencies in the

¶127

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 23/24

¶128

statements of the witnesses with respect to arms used, place of occurrence and the manner of occurrence. Further, neither the informant nor the brothers of the victim saw the assault which took place on Vedanand in the field. Thus their evidence is mere hearsay evidence. The injury report prepared by doctor further shows that there no such grievous injury caused to either of the victims and the nature of injuries were merely simple. There was no wound caused by the use of a farsa or bhala which are sharp edged weapons. Thus, since there is no consistency in the evidence given by the prosecution witnesses, the allegation against the accused is not proved beyond shadow of all reasonable doubt, therefore, giving benefit of doubt to the appellants, it may not be proper to convict the appellants/accused persons on the materials available on record. Hence, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence in the present appeal is fit to be set aside.

¶129

Hence, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.03.2013 passed in Sessions Trial No. 24 of 2004, arising out of Balua Bazar P.S. Case No. 48 of 2002 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Supaul, is set aside and the appellants are acquitted from all the charges leveled against them. As the appellants are on bail, they are discharged

¶130

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.363 of 2013 dt.03-01-2025 24/24

¶131

from their liability of bail bonds.

¶132

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed.

¶133

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)

¶134

S.Katyayan/-

¶135

AFR/NAFR	NAFR
CAV DATE	NA
Uploading Date	10.01.2025
Transmission Date	10.01.2025

Kalanand Lahotiya and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalanand Lahotiya and Ors. v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Islam Khan and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Bajajl Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Binay Kumar

Rahul Ranjan @ Rahul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Raghunath Prasad @ Raghunath Yadav and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar

Manik Lal Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Munna Ravidas @ Munna Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar