Mahendra Rai @ Harendra Narain Singh And Ors. Etc. vs The State Of Bihar
- Court
- Supreme Court
2026 INSC 560
NON- REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 563-564 OF 2020
MAHENDRA RAI @ HARENDRA NARAIN
SINGH AND ORS. ETC. …APPELLANT (S)
[
VERSUS
THE STATE OF BIHAR …RESPONDENT (S)
J U D G M E N T
SANJAY KAROL J.
1. These appeals arise out of the common final judgment and order dated
03.08.2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Government
Appeal(DB)No.56/1989 and Criminal Appeal (DB) No.267/1989, whereby the
High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence awarded by the learned Trial
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
RAJNI MUKHI
Date: 2026.05.26
18:04:43 IST
Reason:
Court against the appellants in connection with a gruesome incident of mass
violence which took place on 29.03.1983 in Village Jamalpur Kodai, P.S. Gaighat,
Criminal Appeal Nos. 563-564 of 2020 Page 1 of 13
District Muzaffarpur, Bihar.
2. Allegedly, a long-standing village rivalry culminated in a grave incident in
which a mob consisting of about 58 accused persons set on fire the residential
house of Chandra Shekhar Choudhary of Village Jamalpur Kodai, P.S. Gaighat,
District Muzaffarpur, resulting in the brutal murder of five members of his
immediate family/village and causing severe injuries to several others. The
incident was reported to the police, leading to registration of Gaighat P.S. Case
No. 38 of 1983. Upon completion of investigation, charge-sheets were laid and
the accused persons were sent up for trial.
3. Charges were framed against the accused persons under Sections 147, 148,
436, 302/149, 324/34, 323 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Accused
Jagannath Ravidas, the then Circle Officer, was separately charged under Sections
302/109, 436/109, 379/109, 324/109 and 323/109 IPC on the allegation that he
had actively abetted the commission of the offences.
4. The prosecution case, as unfolded during trial, discloses that the genesis of
the occurrence lay in an earlier dispute relating to a pumping set and refusal by
the prosecution side to withdraw a criminal case concerning the alleged loot of a
khesari crop. On the date of occurrence, which coincided with the festival of Holi ,
a large mob armed with deadly weapons including lathi, bhala, garasa and farsa
surrounded the house of Chandra Shekhar Choudhary.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 563-564 of 2020 Page 2 of 13
5. It is alleged that at the relevant time Mahanth Indradeo Jyoti, one of the
deceased, was attempting to defend the inmates of the house with his licensed
gun and revolver. The prosecution further alleges that Jagannath Ravidas, the then
Circle Officer, arrived at the place of occurrence, forcibly seized the licensed
firearm and revolver from the deceased, displayed the same before the mob and
thereby emboldened the assailants to proceed with the attack.
6. Immediately thereafter, the mob allegedly set the house ablaze. The family
members who attempted to flee from the burning house towards the southern field
were chased and mercilessly assaulted by the members of the unlawful assembly.
7. The investigation disclosed that Mahanth Indradeo Jyoti, Braj Bhushan
Choudhary, Dr. Indranand Mishra, Lalan @ Ravi Bhushan Choudhary, and Anil
Kumar Jha, died as a result of ante-mortem injuries sustained during the
occurrence. The injured persons included Chandra Shekhar Choudhary, Mani
Kumari, Uma Devi, Maheshwari Devi, Satyendra Jha, Saraswati Devi, Urmila
Devi, Murti Devi, Ram Chandra Mahto, Abinash Choudhary, Dauli (child),
Arvind Kumar, Usha Mishra, Rita Devi, Punam Kumari, Doyal Mona, Ajay
Kumar Choudhary, Munish Kumar and others, many of whom had sustained
grievous injuries.
8. In support of its case, the prosecution examined 46 witnesses including
numerous injured eyewitnesses. The defence examined 13 witnesses.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 563-564 of 2020 Page 3 of 13
9. The medical evidence stood fully proved through PW-1, Dr. Binod Kumar
Mahto, who conducted the post-mortem examinations on four deceased persons
namely, Mahanth Indradeo Jyoti, Braj Bhushan Choudhary, Dr. Indranand
Mishra and Lalan @ Ravi Bhushan Choudhary ; PW-46, Dr. Ram Krishna Prasad
Singh, who conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Anil
Kumar Jha ; PW-43, Dr. Upendra Nath, who examined the injuries of Chandra
Shekhar Choudhary, Mani Kumari, Maheshwari Devi, Uma Devi, Satyendra Jha,
Saraswati Devi, Anil Kumar Jha (while alive), Urmila Devi, Murti Devi, Ram
Chandra Mahto, Abinash Choudhary, Dauli, Arvind Kumar, Usha Mishra, Rita
Devi, Punam Kumari and Doyal Mona at the Primary Health Centre, Gaighat;
PW-44, Dr. Snehansu Gupta, who examined the injuries of Ajay Kumar
Choudhary and Munish Kumar at Sadar Hospital, Muzaffarpur; and PW-45, Dr.
Birendra Prasad, who examined the injuries of Dauli, Punam Kumari, Rita
Choudhary, Usha Mishra, Ram Chandra, Murti Devi, Urmila Devi, Saraswati
Devi, Satendra Kumar, Uma Devi, Mona and Chandra Shekhar Choudhary at
Sadar Hospital, Muzaffarpur. The medical evidence fully establishes that the
deceased persons died due to homicidal ante-mortem injuries caused by
sharp-cutting and hard blunt weapons and that numerous injured witnesses had
sustained serious injuries consistent with the ocular version.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 563-564 of 2020 Page 4 of 13
10. The statements of several injured witnesses were also recorded under
Section 164 Cr.P.C. in the presence of Special Judicial Magistrate Shri Amrendra
Kumar Singh (PW-42), which statements were duly proved during trial.
11. Upon appreciation of the evidence, the learned Trial Judge found that there
was no material sufficient, warranting conviction against certain accused persons
and, as such, acquitted 18 accused persons under Section 232 Cr.P.C. by order
dated 20.01.1989. Their names are: Rajdeo Singh, Amar Yadav, Subodh Lal, Hira
Yadav, Ram Sevak Yadav, Ram Ratan Raut, Chalitra Raut, Mahendra Rai, Dayali
Yadav, Surendra Singh Yadav, Sushil Yadav, Sheo Chandra Yadav, Dhaneshwar
Rai, Maheshwar Rai, Uchit Rai, Khakhan Rai, Sone Lal Rai and Uchit Rai.
We find that the testimonies of the 13 defence witnesses, whose names
appear at page 111 of the High Court judgment, namely DW-1 Raj Kishore Rai ,
DW-2 Habib Ahmad , DW-3 Raj Kishore Rai , DW-4 Vidya Sagar Choudhary ,
DW-5 Jogendra Thakur , DW-6 Ashok Kumar Mahaseth , DW-7 Khobhari Rai ,
DW-8 Ramesh Kumar, DW-9 Jeevnath Rai, DW-10 Jeevan Rai, DW-11 Dr.
Manoranjan Kumar Srivastava, DW-12 Vishwanath Prasad and DW-13
Rajendra Prasad , do not advance the case of the defence. On the contrary, they
materially corroborate the prosecution version regarding the occurrence, the
presence of the accused at the place of occurrence and wholly belie the plea of
alibi raised by the accused persons.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 563-564 of 2020 Page 5 of 13
12. The Trial Court convicted the remaining accused persons under Sections
302/149, 436/149, 147, 148, 379, 323 and 324 IPC and sentenced them to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for life for the principal offence under Section 302/149
IPC along with other sentences, all directed to run concurrently. Accused
Jagannath Ravidas was convicted under Sections 302/109, 436/109, 379/109,
324/109 and 323/109 IPC, the Court finding that he had abetted the crime by
forcibly taking the licensed gun and revolver from deceased Mahanth Indradeo
Jyoti and thereby emboldening the mob.
13. Aggrieved thereby, the convicted accused preferred appeals before the
High Court. During pendency of the appeals, several appellants expired and the
appeals stood abated against them.
14. The High Court, after re-appreciating the entire evidence on record,
accepted the plea of juvenility raised by Appellant Nos. 21, 34 and 38 and referred
their cases to the Juvenile Justice Board for consequential proceedings. The High
Court also took note of the order passed by this Court dated 29.04.2022 extending
the benefit of juvenility to accused Jugat Lal Rai.
15. However, insofar as the remaining appellants are concerned, the High
Court affirmed the findings recorded by the Trial Court, and upheld the conviction
and sentence imposed upon them.
16. In so far as juvenility is concerned, it is also a matter of record that in
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 267 of 1989, Appellant Nos. 21, 34 and 38 were found,
Criminal Appeal Nos. 563-564 of 2020 Page 6 of 13
to be juveniles on the date of occurrence upon due enquiry by the Juvenile Justice
Board, Muzaffarpur. By orders dated 26.08.2013 and 16.05.2014, their plea of
juvenility was accepted, their conviction was maintained, but the question of
sentence was directed to be dealt with in terms of the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act 2015 by the Juvenile Justice Board, particularly with
regard to imposition of appropriate fine and consequential orders. It is further on
record that, vide order dated 29.04.2022, this Court has also extended the benefit
of juvenility to accused Jugat Lal Rai.
17. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants contended before us
that the prosecution case suffers from exaggeration and over-implication; that
many of the appellants were merely present at the place of occurrence and did not
share any common object; and that the conviction with the aid of Section 149 IPC
is unsustainable.
18. It was further submitted that the incident allegedly arose out of a sudden
altercation regarding a pumping set and, therefore, the prosecution has failed to
establish any premeditated common object to commit murder.
19. Per contra , learned counsel appearing for the State supported the
concurrent findings recorded by the Courts below and submitted that the evidence
of injured eyewitnesses fully establishes the participation of the accused persons
and their common object.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 563-564 of 2020 Page 7 of 13
20. Having carefully considered the submissions advanced and upon perusal
of the entire material on record, we find no merit in the appeals.
21. The High Court’s assessment of the evidence is detailed and reasoned. The
eyewitnesses, including PW-2 Ved Narayan Choudhary , PW-4 Usha Mishra,
PW-5 Saraswati Devi, PW-34 Murti Devi, PW-35 Uma Devi, PW-37 Rita Devi,
PW-38 Maheshwari Devi and PW-40 Chandra Shekhar Choudhary , have
consistently narrated the manner in which the assailants, without any justified
cause, set the house of Chandra Shekhar Choudhary, on fire and by forming an
unlawful assembly, brutally killed five members, while causing serious injuries
to others who were helpless and defenceless. Their version stands corroborated
by independent witnesses PW-6 Mangat Singh, PW-8 Ram Bahadur Paswan and
PW-41 Uday , who had no animus and whose testimonies are unimpeachable.
22. The High Court has meticulously summarized the role of each accused
person and identified those who ignited the straw, those who set the house on fire,
those who chased the fleeing victims and those who inflicted fatal blows upon the
deceased persons.
Name of surviving accused persons. (No.
has been assigned as per their position in
the cause title of Criminal Appeal (DB) No.
267 of 1989)
Witnesses who have
specifically named the
accused setting straw/house
on fire
Witnesses who have
identified the accused
persons present in the
mob
Witnesses who have identified
the accused persons who had
engaged in assault, beating &
lynching.
PW3, PW10, PW13, PW15,
PW16, PW17, PW22, PW24,
PW25, PW26, PW27, PW23,
PW36
2. Mahendra Rai @ Harendra Narain Singh, PW2, PW5, PW6, PW8,
PW20
S/o. Bhagat Rai PW18, PW19
PW2, PW3, PW14, PW20,
5. Krishnandan Rai S/o. Hira Lal Rai
PW26, PW38
PW2, PW6, PW8, PW18,
PW19
PW3, PW10, PW13, PW14,
PW22, PW25, PW26, PW23
6. Ram Udar Rai, S/o. Prem Rai PW2, PW6, PW18 PW3
PW2, PW6, PW8, PW18,
8. Mita Ram Rai, S/o. Sukan Rai PW2, PW3, PW20
PW19
PW3, PW18, PW24, PW25,
PW23
9. Ganesh Rai, S/o. Charittar Rai PW2, PW6, PW18 PW3, PW22
Criminal Appeal Nos. 563-564 of 2020 Page 8 of 13
Name of surviving accused persons. (No.
has been assigned as per their position in
the cause title of Criminal Appeal (DB) No.
267 of 1989)
Witnesses who have
specifically named the
accused setting straw/house
on fire
Witnesses who have
identified the accused
persons present in the
mob
Witnesses who have identified
the accused persons who had
engaged in assault, beating &
lynching.
PW3, PW13, PW22, PW25,
10. Ram Lal Rai, S/o. Bhogi Rai PW20 PW2, PW8, PW18, PW19
PW26
PW2, PW5, PW8, PW19,
11. Ram Ekbal Rai S/o. Jogi Rai
PW38
PW24, PW13, PW18, PW22,
PW25, PW26, PW27
PW2, PW6, PW18,
13. Ram Binay Rai, S/o. Prem Rai PW16, PW27
PW19, PW40
14. Panchan Rai @ Ram Prabhanjan Rai, S/o.
PW20 PW2, PW18, PW19 PW3, PW13, PW23, PW22
Prem Rai
15. Ramashish Rai, S/o. Dhanukhi Rai PW6, PW8, PW20, PW36 PW2, PW5, PW6 PW22
20. Kapildeo Rai, S/o Prem Rai PW20 PW2, PW6, PW40 PW22, PW25, PW26
21. Ramadhar Rai, S/o. Subudh Lal Rai (Juvenile) PW2, PW38 PW17, PW22
24. Siya Saran Rai S/o. Khakhan Rai PW2, PW3, PW20 PW2, PW6, PW18, PW38, PW40 PW3, PW17, PW22, PW25, PW23
26. Kapildeo Rai, S/o. Sukan Rai PW2, PW6
31. Sukh Nandan Rai, S/o. Chalitar Rai PW2, PW40 PW3, PW26
32. Bujhawan Rai S/o. Hira Lal Rai PW20 PW2, PW5, PW8
33. Ram Singar Rai S/o. Hira Lal Rai PW2, PW5, PW19
34. Vidya Nand Rai S/o. Bhujawan Rai. (Juvenile) PW20 PW38 PW22
36. Phekan Rai, S/o Asharfi Rai PW20 PW19, PW38, PW40 PW22
37. Khakhanu Rai, S/o. Methur Rai PW38, PW40 PW24, PW26, PW36
38. Rama Nand Rai, S/o. Mahendra Rai (Juvenile) PW20 PW38, PW40 PW3, PW22, PW26, PW27, PW36
39. Subudh Lal Rai, S/o. Bishuni Rai PW20 PW2, PW6, PW19, PW38, PW40 PW3, PW17, PW22
40. Ramhit Rai, S/o. Khakhan Rai PW38, PW40 PW23, PW25
41. Nand Kishore Rai, S/o. Prem Rai PW2 PW27
42. Garbhu Rai, S/o. Charittar Rai PW20 PW2, PW38, PW40 PW22, PW23
43. Shiva Chandra Rai S/o. Sukhdeo Rai PW20 PW2, PW38, PW40 PW22, PW36
PW2, PW40 PW22
45. Jugut Lal Rai @ Nirmal Rai, son of Lakshmi Rai
46. Kanhai Rai, S/o Janak Rai PW40 PW22, PW26, PW27
47. Sita Ram Rai, S/o. Fakira Rai PW18
48. Nirsu Rai @ Nuja Rai, S/o. Rudal Rai PW17
Name of the
Specific role assigned by the Witnesses to the accused persons regarding the mode of overt-act/assault on
Witness
Witnesses
the victims/injured persons.
Methur Rai A3D and Prit Lal Rai A12D had inflicted farsa blow on Mahanth Indradeo Choudhary. Saukhi Rai
PW5 Saraswati Devi
A35D had inflicted lathi blow on PW5 resulting in breaking of her hand.
Mita Ram A8, Siya Ram A7D and Siya Saran A24 had inflicted lathi blow on Chandra Shekhar Choudhary PW40.
PW6 Langat Singh
These accused persons along with with others had also beaten other family members.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 563-564 of 2020 Page 9 of 13
Name of the
Specific role assigned by the Witnesses to the accused persons regarding the mode of overt-act/assault on
Witness
Witnesses
the victims/injured persons.
Awadhesh
PW16
Singh
Mahendra A2, Batahu Rai A17D, Ram Binay A13 and others had beaten the family members of Chandra Shekhar
Choudhary PW40.
Krishna Dev
PW22 The child of Braj Bhushan Choudhary was snatched by the mob & thrown in fire, however, the child was saved.
Choudhary
The mob started throwing Rora, Pathar and Dhela. Chandra Shekhar Choudhary PW40 was beaten by Siya Ram
PW25 Devendra Jha
Rai A7D, Mita Ram Rai A8, Lakshmi Rai A23D and Ishwar Rai A21D.
Prit Lal Rai A12D, Methur Rai A3D, Siya Ram Rai A7D and Siya Saran Rai A24 had set the straw of PW33 on
fire. PW33’s mother Murti Devi and brother-in-law (Dewar) were beaten by Prit Lal Rai A12D, Methur Rai A3D,
Siya Ram Rai A7D and Siya Saran Rai A24. The mob had engaged in setting the house of Chandra Shekhar
Choudhary PW40 on fire and had also engaged in assault.
PW33 Mithila Devi
The straw of PW34 was put on fire by Prit Lal Rai A12D. Methur Rai A3D and Siya Ram Rai A7D were seen
near the straw, whereafter Prit Lal Rai A12D, Methur Rai A3D, Siya Ram Rai A7D, Siya Saran Rai A24, Mita
Ram Rai A8, Subudh Lal Rai A39, Ramadhar Rai A21, Garbhu Rai A42, Hulash Rai and others entered inside
the courtyard. Then Mahendra Rai A2 exhorted to the people, whereafter Prit Lal Rai A12D, Methur Rai A3D,
Siya Ram Rai A7D, Siya Saran Rai A24, Mita Ram Rai A8 started beating brother of son-in-law of PW34. The
accused persons had also beaten PW34. PW34 was also beaten by Prit Lal Rai A12D, Siya Ram Rai A7D, Siya
Saran Rai A24, Mita Ram Rai A8, Subudh Rai, Ramadhar Rai A21, Garbhu Rai A42.
PW34 Murti Devi
PW35’s family members were beaten by mob by lathi, bhala, garasa & farsa resulting in death of her husband
Braj Bhushan Choudhary, Ravi Bhushan Choudhary, Mahanth Indradeo Jyoti & Dr. Indranand Mishra &
subsequently Anil Kumar Jha also died. PW35 was beaten by Kudal by Krishnandan Rai A5 & he snatched her
son from her hand & threw him in the fire.
PW35 Uma Devi
Mahanth Indradeo Jyoti was beaten by accused Mahendra Rai A2 and Siya Ram Rai A7D by farsa as well as by
Krishnandan Rai A5 and Prit Lal Rai A12D by farsa resulting in his death. Ramashish Rai A15 and Jagrit Rai
A4D had beaten Dr. Indranand Mishra by bhala. Surendra Rai and Methur Rai A3D had beaten Dr. Indranand
Mishra by farsa and Mita Ram Rai A8 had beaten him by bhala resulting in his death there. Braj Bhushan
Choudhary and Ravi Bhushan Choudhary were beaten by bhala by Jagrit Rai A4D, Ramashish Rai A15 and Ram
Ekbal Rai A11, by farsa by Methur Rai A3D and Krishnandan Rai A5, by bhala by Siya Ram Rai A7D and Ganesh
Rai A9 and by lathi by Shiv Shankar Rai A1D. PW36 was beaten by farsa by Ram Lal Rai A10, by garasa by
Ram Udar Rai A6 and by Kudal by Panchan Rai A14.
PW36 Nagendra Jha
The mob was throwing Rora, Pathar and had engaged in assault by lathi, bhala, farsa and garasa. PW37 stated
about death of five persons at the place of occurrence and the family members being injured by the accused
persons. PW37 was also injured and her knee and talwa got burnt by fire.
Rita
PW37
Choudhary
Son-in-law of PW38 i.e Mahanth Indradeo Jyoti was beaten by bhala by Mahendra Rai A2 and Siya Ram Rai
A7D, by farsa by Krishnandan Rai A5 and Prit Lal Rai A12D. Dr. Indranand Mishra was beaten by bhala by Jagrit
Rai A4D and Ramashish Rai A15, by farsa by Methur Rai A3D and Surendra Rai and by garasa by Mita Ram Rai
A8. PW38’s son Braj Bhushan Choudhary and Ravi Bhushand Choudhary were beaten by bhala, by Ramashish
Rai A15, Siya Ram Rai A7D and Jagrit Rai A4D, by farsa by Krishnandan Rai A5 and Prit Lal Rai A12D and by
lathi by Fekan Rai A36, Shiv Shankar Rai A1D and RamBinay Rai A13. Methur Rai A3D had also beaten them
by farsa. Ram Binay Rai A13 had also beaten them. Anil Kumar Jha was beaten by farsa by Ram Lal Rai A10, by
garasa by Ram Udar Rai A6 and by Kudal by Panchan Rai A14 apart from being beaten by lathi by some persons.
PW38 was beaten by Methur Rai A3D by lathi portion of the farsa and he had also snatched gold chain from her
neck apart from snatching attaché containing jewelry from her Natini namely Usha Mishra PW4.
Maheshwari
PW38
Devi
Indradeo Jyoti was beaten by bhala by Mahendra Rai A2 and Siya Ram Rai A7D, by farsa by Krishnandan Rai
A5 and Prit Lal Rai A12D. Dr. Indranand Mishra was beaten by farsa by Methur Rai A3D and Surendra Rai, by
garasa by Mita Ram Rai A8 by bhala by Jagrit Rai A4D and Ramashish Rai A15. Braj Bhushan and Ravi Bhushan
was beaten by farsa by Krishnandan Rai A5, Siya Ram Rai A7D and Methur Rai A3D, by bhala by Ram Ekbal
Rai A11 and Ganesh Rai A9 and by lathi by Shiv Shankar Rai A1D. Anil Kumar Jha was beaten by farsa by Ram
Lal Rai A10, by garasa by Ram Udar Rai A6, by Kudal by Panchan Rai A14 and by gupti by Ramadhar Rai A21.
PW40 has stated about death of 4 persons at the place of occurrence and one person at the hospital. PW40 stated
that apart from him, his wife Maheshwari Devi PW38, daughter Sarswati Devi PW5, Putohu Uma Devi PW35
and Rita Devi PW37, Natini Usha Devi PW4 received injuries. PW40 has stated that other family members were
also beaten. PW40 is stated to have been beaten by Awadhesh Rai, Fekan Rai A36 and Parichhan Rai A16D,
resulting in breaking of his hands and head. PW40 has stated that earlier also accused persons had assaulted him
for not compromising cases. Prit Lal Rai A12D tried to inflict knife blow on son in law of PW40 but it hit Umesh
Rai whereafter, he went away with the Yadavs on foot. PW40 had seen the accused persons assaulting all the
victims.
Chandra
Shekhar
Choudhary
PW40
110. The witnesses, who had identified surviving accused carrying weapons, can be examined in the following manner:-
Name of the accused persons (No. has been assigned as per their
Bhala Pharsa Lathi Kudal Garasa
position in the cause title of Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 267 of 1989)
PW6, PW8, PW13, PW16,
2. Mahendra Rai @ Harendra Narain Singh, S/o. Bhagat Rai
PW17, PW22, PW26,
Criminal Appeal Nos. 563-564 of 2020 Page 10 of 13
Name of the accused persons (No. has been assigned as per their
Bhala Pharsa Lathi Kudal Garasa
position in the cause title of Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 267 of 1989)
PW8, PW14,
5. Krishnandan Rai S/o.Hira Lal Rai
PW26,
8. Mita Ram Rai, S/o. Sukan Rai PW6
9. Ganesh Rai, S/o Charittar Rai PW6, PW22,
10. Ram Lal Rai, S/o. Bhogi Rai. PW26, PW22,
11. Ram Ekbal Rai S/o. Jogi Rai. PW22, PW26, PW13,
13. Ram Binay Rai, S/o Prem Rai. PW16,
14.Panchan Rai @ Ram Prabhanjan Rai, S/o Prem Rai. PW22,
24. Siya Saran Rai S/o Khakhan Rai PW6
40.Ramhit Rai, S/oKhakhan Rai. PW14,
46.Kanhai Rai, S/o Janak Rai. PW15,
PW23 has stated that rest of the accused were carrying Lathi, Bhala & Garasa.
PW26 has stated that rest of the accused were carrying Lathi & Kudal.
23. The findings recorded by the High Court clearly establish that the accused
persons constituted an unlawful assembly, were armed with deadly weapons and
acted in furtherance of their common object of setting the house ablaze and
causing death of members of the family of Chandra Shekhar Choudhary.
24. Once the common object of the unlawful assembly stands established,
every member thereof becomes vicariously liable for acts committed in
prosecution of such common object. The liability contemplated under Section 149
IPC squarely stands attracted in the facts of the present case. Learned Counsel for
1
the appellants has placed reliance on (i) Santosh v. The State of M.P . (ii) State
2
of Karnataka v. Chikkahottappa @ Varade Gowda and Ors . (iii) State of Assam
3 4
v. Barga Dewani and Ors and (iv) Anup Lal Yadav v. State of Biha r .
1
AIR 1975 SC 654
2
AIR 2008 SC 2692
3
1970 (3) SCC 236
4
(2014) 10 SCC 275
Criminal Appeal Nos. 563-564 of 2020 Page 11 of 13
25. The contention that some of the appellants were mere spectators deserves
outright rejection. The evidence-on-record clearly establishes active participation
by the accused persons in different stages of the occurrence, including
surrounding the house, setting it on fire, chasing the victims and assaulting them
with lethal weapons.
26. Equally untenable is the submission that the occurrence arose merely out
of an altercation concerning a pump set between Brij Bhushan and Chandra
Shekhar Chaudhry. Even assuming that there existed such prior hostility, the
same can never justify the formation of an unlawful assembly of such magnitude,
armed with deadly weapons leading to the brutal killing of five persons and
causing grievous injuries to numerous others.
27. Insofar as accused Jagannath Ravidas, is concerned, both the Trial Court
and the High Court have concurrently found that he had actively facilitated the
commission of the offence by disarming the victims at a crucial stage and thereby
emboldening the mob. We find no reason to take a different view.
28. We are satisfied that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt
the ingredients of the offences charged against the appellants. The concurrent
findings recorded by the Trial Court and affirmed by the High Court are based
upon proper appreciation of evidence and do not suffer from any perversity
warranting interference under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 563-564 of 2020 Page 12 of 13
29. The brutality of the incident, in which five persons belonging to the same
family lost their lives and several others including women and children sustained
serious injuries, shocks the judicial conscience. The Courts below have rightly
observed that the case leaves no room for misplaced sympathy or leniency.
30. In view of the foregoing discussion, we find no ground to interfere with the
impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court.
31. Consequently, the appeals stand dismissed.
32. The surviving accused persons, except those who have been granted the
benefit of juvenility by this Court or Courts below, are directed to surrender
forthwith before the Trial Court concerned and serve the remaining part of their
sentence. Their bail bonds, if any, stand cancelled.
33. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
……………………………………………..J.
(SANJAY KAROL)
……….……………………………………..J.
(NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH)
New Delhi
May 26, 2026
Criminal Appeal Nos. 563-564 of 2020 Page 13 of 13