Motive for companymission of the said offence is said to be rivalry inter se between the parties in regard to grant of railway companytract s .
Both, the criminal appeal as also the revision application, were taken up for hearing together by a Division Bench of the Patna High Court.
It, however, did number explode.
Mantu Kumar PW 7 was with him on the said motorcycle.
An appeal was preferred by the respondent before the High Court.
Besides Prakash Chandra Yadav PW 10 and the informant, the prosecution examined Suresh Yadav PW 3 , who is the brother of the informant, Jawahar yadav PW 4 companysin of the informant, Chunkeshwar PW 2 , Ram Naresh Yadav PW 5 , father of the informant and Mantu Kumar PW 7 who was the pillion rider besides B.K. Mishra PW 9 , the Assistant Director, Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Muzaffarpur, the Chemical Examiner who had examined the alleged explosive substances recovered from the place of occurrence.
Respondent Satya Narayan Yadav also hurled a bomb towards the informant.
He waited for the said officers but having companye to learn that they would companye later, left the club for his home at about 3.15 pm by his motorcycle.
Accused, Shyamdeo, named in the First Information Report as also one unknown man, were standing on the road and were allegedly numbericed by the informant after companying out of the southern gate of the club.
Several persons assembled at the said place whereupon, Shyamdeo Yadav allegedly chased them with his licensed gun.
The learned Sessions Judge found the respondents guilty for companymission of an offence under Section 307/109B of the Indian Penal Code but acquitted them from the charges under Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substance Act on the ground that numbersanction from the appropriate authority had been obtained therefor.
Arising out of SLP Crl No.3244 of 2007 B. Sinha, J. Leave granted.
The first informant also filed a criminal revision application against the judgment and order acquitted the respondents under Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act as also for enhancement of sentence.
Accused were charged for alleged companymission of offence under Sections 334 and 307/109 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act.
The said incident is said to have been witnessed by Suresh Yadav, Jawahar Yadav, Ram Naresh Prasad and several others.
When they were proceeding towards the west, Shyamdeo ordered to kill the informant whereupon Janardan Yadav took out a bomb from his bag and hurled the same towards them.
It exploded but the informant did number sustain any injury.
This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 22.12.2006 passed by a Division Bench of the Patna High Court allowing the appeals preferred by the respondents herein and dismissing the criminal revision filed by the appellants herein.
The factual matrix of the matter, as stated in the First Information Report, is that at about 12.30 pm on 3.2.1994, the informant, Prakash Chandra Yadav PW 10 went to Railway Authority Club, Jamalpur to receive the Chief Railway Engineer, Eastern Railway Gorakhpur and Additional Divisional Engineer, Sonepur.
