Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
JAG NARAIN DUSADH & ANR.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
THE STATE OF BIHAR
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 27/11/1997
BENCH:
G.T. NANAVATI, V.N. KHARE
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
NANAVATI, J.
Criminal Appeal No.422/89 has been filed by original
accused Nos. 2 and Criminal Appeal No.423/89 is filed by
accused Nos. 2 to 4 and 6 to 8. The accused No. 5 had also
applied to this Court for leave to appeal but his SLP was
dismissed. The original accused No.1 has not filed any
appeal against his conviction. Accused No. 8 is appellant in
both the appeals.
All these 9 accused were tried along with others for
causing death of Nanahaku Pandey in prosecution of their
common object. The trial court acquitted accused Nos. 10 to
15 and convicted accused Nos. 1 to 9. All of them except
accused No.8 were convicted under Section 148 IPC and
accused No.8 was convicted under Section 147 IPC. All of
them were convicted under Section 302/149 IPC. Accused No.1
Jwala and accused No.5 Hardeo were also convicted under
Section 02 read with Section 34 IPC . Accused Nos. 1,2,3,5,6
and 7 were also convicted under section 27 of the Arms Act.
In order to prove its case prosecution had relied upon
the evidence of 4 eye witnesses. P.Ws. 1,2,3 and 4. P.W.1
was the brother of the deceased, P.W. 2 was the father of
the deceased and P.Ws. 3 and 4 were the near relatives. P.W.
3 was not believed by the trial court and relying upon the
evidence of P.Ws. 1,2 and 4 the trial court convicted the
accused as stated above. Accused Nos. 9 to 14 who have been
referred to in the judgment as Pandeys were given benefit of
doubt as they were shown as accused on the basis of the only
allegation that they were helping and instigating the
harijans, accused Nos. 1 to 9, who had on the date of the
incident gone to the field of the informant and the deceased
and committed the said offence. As there was no evidence to
show any participation by them in commission of t he offence
they were given benefit of doubt.
The High Court on reappreciation of evidence of P.Ws.
1,2 and 4 held that their evidence is consistent and does
not suffer from any infirmity at all. The said 3 witnesses
were in their own field along with the deceased and they
were cutting grass when the incident took place. Their
evidence clearly establishes the fact that they should lease
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
the land as it really belong to Ambika, accused No. 3. On
being so told, the deceased replied by saying that the land
belonged to them and that this dispute was already settled
by the Panch and there was Sulahanama in that behalf. It was
at that item that accused Jwala dn accused Hardeo fired
shots from their guns and injured Nanahaku.
Both the courts below have believed P.Ws. 1,2 and 4.
What is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant
is that as the courts have disbelieved their evidence with
respect to the other accused, their evidence could not have
formed the basis for the conviction of the appellants. We do
not find any substance in its contention. As stated earlier
the allegation against those accused was that they had
colluded with the harijans, that is, accused Nos. 1 to 9 and
in pursuance of that collusion the said offence was
committed. But there was no evidence to prove that they had
gone to the field where the incident had taken place. No
other contention was raised by the learned counsel for the
appellant. As we do not find any substance in these appeals,
they are dismissed. The appellants are ordered to surrender
to custody to serve out the remaining part of their
sentence.