393 of 1986, with leave of this Court against the acquittal of accused No.
Present Honble Mr. justice G.T. Nanavati Honble Mr. Justice S.P. Kurdukar K. Jha, Pankaj Kalra, S.K. Singh, B.K. Sharma and Vijay Kumar, advs.
It was submitted that the evidence of eye witness being companysistent, ought to have been accepted by the high Court.
In order to prove its case, the prosecution had examined 8 eye witnesses.
on the Next day.
The two injured had received three injuries each but they were minor injuries.
from Muzaffarpur town where the incident took place and their explanation for their presence near the place of occurrence is number companyvincing iii the fard bayan though stated to have been recorded at 11.30 p.m. was possibly number recorded till 2.00 p.m. on the next day and the eye witness have suppressed the real manner in which the incident took place as they have failed to explain how a serious injury was received by one of the accused, Ram Nath prasad Gupta.
for the appellants K. Jain, K.D. Prasad, A.N. Bardiyar and M.P. Jha, Advs.
with him for the respondents.
The learned companynsel for the appellants challenged the finding recorded by the High Court that the fard bayan of injured witness, Ramesh Prasad Singh was number recorded till 2.00 P.m.
None of them was caused by a weapon with a sharp edge.
569 of 1981 in the Patna High Court.
However, we find numbersubstance in the other companytentions raised by the learned companynsel for the appellants.
J U D G M E N T The following Judgment of the Court was delivered.
1, Ram Chandra Singh only.
This Court, however, Injured witness, Ramesh Prasad Thakur and Shanti Devi, widow of deceased Bacha Thakur have filed Criminal Appeal No.
13 to 16.
506 and 569 of 1981.
The trial Court found them reliable but though their evidence was companysistent, on reappreciation of the entire evidence, the High Court companysidered it unsafe to rely upon their evidence.
Accused Nos.2 to 12 challenged their companyviction and sentence by preferring criminal Appeal No.
506 of 1981 and Ram Chandra Singh did so by preferring a separate appeal, viz.,
State of Bihar V. Bishwanath Rai Ors.
WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
The State feeling aggrieved applied for special leave of this Court to appeal against all the 12 accused who were companyvicted by the trial Court but acquitted by the High Court.
It held that the other accused had formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of their companymon object, caused the death of Bacha Thakur.
as incorrect.
On scrutiny of the evidence of Ram Jiwan Singh PW 13 , Sub Inspector of police who had recorded the fard bayan, the Deputy Superintendent of police PW 16 and the Superintendent of Police DW 1 and also the Injury Certificate Exh.4 of Ramesh Prasad Thakur and the fard bayan Exh.
393 OF 1986 NANAVATI, J. These three appeals, first two by the State of Bihar and the other by injured witness Ramesh Prasad Thakur and Shanti Devi widow of deceased, Bacha Thakur, are directed against there judgement and order of acquittal dated 4th September, 1985 passed by the Patna High Court in Criminal Appeal Nos.
Both the appeals were heard together and disposed of by a companymon judgment.
The High Court allowed both the appeals and acquitted the accuse.
The fard bayan which was recorded between 8.00 a.m. and 2.00 P.M. on recorded by the High Court is thus clearly wrong.
As many as 16 accused were tried for the murder of Bacha Thakur and for causing injuries to Ram Prasad Thakur and Chandra Mohan Thakur.
Criminal Appeal No.
