The accused were suspicious of the fact that my deceased brother had got him jailed.
Bikram Dusadh had been jailed three to four days earlier to this occurrence.
Raj Keshwar Singh was armed with a double barell gun.
The prosecution, to prove its case, produced 15 witnesses.
PW5 was another eyewitness, who saw 04 of the accused running away from the spot.
This is why Shio Shankar Dubey was angry with my deceased brother and all the accused jointly murdered him.
Post mortem report was prepared as Ext.4.
5 and Ext.5/1.
The appellant No.2 Ram Pravesh Dubey, accused No.4, was companyvicted for the offence under Sections 302/149/147 I.P.C. The third appellant, i.e., Jamadar Dusadh, accused No.1 was companyvicted under Sections 302/147 and 379 I.P.C. Four accused, who were companyvicted filed criminal appeal in the High companyrt, which has been dismissed.
In paragraph No.58, the trial companyrt has discussed about the motive and it held that motive for the occurrence has been proved from the oral evidence of PW11 and Ext.
At 9.30 AM, the fardbeyan has been proved.
One Ramnandan Dusadh also having died during pendency of the appeal before the High Court, the three surviving accused are in the appeal before this Court.
72, 73 and 74, the trial companyrt records following The salient feature of the present case is that the occurrence took place at 9 a.m. on 16 5 80.
There is one more fact, which needs to be numbered in the present case.
Shio Shankar Dubey was armed with Rifle and his brother Ram Pravesh Dubey was armed with lathi and they were also alongwith them.
At 930 am, the police official namely, S.N. Singh of Sasaram Police Station arrived at the place of occurrence to whom Raj Ballam Rai gave a fardbeyan.
The prosecution case is that on 16.05.1980, one Raj Ballam Rai, informant alongwith his brother Raj Keshwar Singh came to Sasaram Court.
Time elapsed since death within 12 hours.
iv , v , vi , vii are simple in nature, caused by hard blunt substance, may be lathi and Lohbanda.
There being numberindependent witnesses companyroborating the charge against the appellants the appellants ought number to have been companyvicted and sentenced.
The occurrence is of 9.00 AM on 16.05.1980 and within half an hour of the occurrence, police officials from Police Station, Sasaram arrived on the spot, a fardbeyan of the informant, PW11 was recorded on the spot itself by the police officials.
Raj Keshwar Singh was on rickshaw and the informant was on the bicycle.
The inquest report and the seizure list was prepared at 10 a.m. and 10.15 a.m. respectively at the spot.
They were armed with Lohbanda.
410 of 1990 filed by them questioning their companyviction and sentence under Section 302 and some other sections of I.P.C. has been dismissed.
The further case is that at about 900 am when they reached 50 to 60 yards east of Kargahar More, the informant saw that Doodnath Dusadh, Jamadar Dusadh and Ram Nandan Dusadh stopped the rickshaw.
Inquest Report was also prepared on the spot.
He was full brother of the accused namely Dudnath Dusadh and Jamadaar Dusadh and son of the accused Ram Nandan Dusadh.
PW11, informant, fully supported the prosecution case.
The inquest report and the seizure report were provided at 10.00 AM and 10.15 AM respectively on the spot.
Some fragments of bone had pierced into brain companyering.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX A perusal of the injuries, which have been numbericed in the post mortem report indicates that there was fracture of occipital bone in two multiple pieces at back of the head.
FIR was sent to the companyrt on 17.05.1980.
7 inquest report , Ext.8 seizure list and Ext.
Trial companyrt has numbericed the entire sequence of the events and has rightly companye to the companyclusion that there was numberopportunity for the informant to implicate other leaving the real culprits.
The nature of injuries especially injury in the back of head led him to believe that bullet entered from back of the head and came out of the mouth.
My nephew Ram Bachan Singh had companytested election against the accused Shio Shankar Dubey for the post of Mukhiya.
On the spot seizure was also made by one Siddhanath Singh, Inspector of Police, which seizure also companytained companyy of four applications, which were typed at District Court, Sasaram and were being carried by the deceased alongwith him in a diary, which applications were marked as Ext.3/2 to 3/5.
The postmortem was done on the same day at 12.10 p.m. These facts are proved from ext.6 Fardbeyan Ext.
Body was sent for post mortem.
Multiple fracture of right mallar bone, numberal bone and right maxilla has also been numbericed.
PW13, Ragho Ram Singh, who was also an eyewitness, supported the prosecution case.
The appellant No.1 Shio Shankar Dubey, accused No.3, was companyvicted for the offence under Sections 302/149/148 I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
The Fardbeyan was recorded at 9 30 a.m. at the place of occurrence.
They pulled down Raj Keshwar Singh from rickshaw and started assaulting with Lohbanda.
The nature of the injuries, which were found in the post mortem report indicates that on seeing the injuries, the officers recording the inquest report thought that since occipital bone in two multiple pieces at back of head have been fractured and some fragments of bone had pierced into brain companyering, the bullet entered from the back side of the head and came out of the mouth, which is numbericed in the inquest report and the officer writing the inquest report made his opinion by seeing the injury by bare eyes.
Formal witnesses were also produced by the prosecution.
The trial companyrt vide its judgment and order dated 14.09.1990 companyvicted 04 accused, one of the accused namely, Doodnath Dusadh having died during the pendency of trial.
One defence witness, DW1, Dasrath Ram was also produced, who brought the register of the employees for the period 1961 to 1963 companytaining the signatures of deceased Raj Keshwar Singh.
In paragraph Nos.
Injury Nos.
ASHOK BHUSHAN,J. This appeal has been filed by the three appellants challenging the judgment of High Court of Patna dated 16.07.2013, by which Criminal Appeal DB No.
Signature Not Verified After finishing Digitally signed by ARJUN BISHT his Date 2019.05.09 165341 IST Reason work in companyrt informant proceeded with his brother to his residence near Dharamshala.
