LexJALESHWAR SINGH versus STATE OF BIHAR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
(2009] 8 S.C.R. 130 A JALESHWAR SINGH v. STATE OF BIHAR (Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 1999) 8 MAY 6, 2009 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND P. SATHASIVAM, JJ.) Penal Code, 1860 - ss. 307 rlw 110 - Dispute between parties - Exhortation by accused and thereafter infliction of c fatal blow by other accused - Conviction of accused ulss. 302 rlw 109 and sentenced to imprisonment for life, by High Court - On appeal, held: Deceased's wife and his father stated that there were physical fights abuses - Accused persons were armed - There was no direct exhortation to kill but was to the D effect that deceased and others should not be permitted to run away and should be attacked - Thereafter, other accused inflicted blow on deceased - However, evidence of the said witnesses different as to manner of exhortation - Hence, accused to be convicted u/ss. 307 rlw 110 with 7 years of E custodial sentence. In this appeal, the order of courts below, convicting the appellant no. 1-accused under ss.302 read with s.109 IPC, is under challenge. F Partly allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: PW-4 is the informant i.e. wife of the deceased and PW-3 is the father of the deceased. From the evidence of PWs 3 and 4 it is clear that there were G physical fights abuses. At the time of abuses except PWs 3 and 4 nobody else was there. The other persons came there just to stop the fight hearing noise on the road. On a close reading of the evidence, it is seen that the 4 accused persons were armed. There was really no direct H 130 JALESHWAR SINGH v. STATE OF BIHAR 131 exhortation to kill but the same was to the effect that the A deceased and others should not be permitted to run away and should be attacked. On hearing the exhortation accused no. 2 pierced the spear to the chest of the deceased. The evidence of PWs 3 and 4 are different as to the manner of exhortation. One says 'maro sale B Chintamani ko' while the other said 'maro sale ko jaan se'. The words 'jaan se' appears to be entered later in the records. Thus, the appropriate conviction would be under section 307 read with section 110 IPC. Custodial sentence of 7 years would meet the ends of justice. (Paras 3 and c 4] (134-H; 135-A-D] CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 1999. From the Judgment & Order date.d 26.09.1997 of the High D Court of Judicature at Patna in Crl. Appeal No .. 201 of 1991. Ambhoj Kumar Singh and Ratan Kumar Choudhuri for the Appellant. Anukul Raj and Gopal Singh for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Challenge in this appeal is E by Accused No.1 who alongwith two others faced trial before F learned Sessions Judge. Present appellant was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC'). Accused No.3-Bir Bahadur Singh was convicted under Section 302 IPC. Both A-1 and A- 3 were sentenced to imprisonment for life. A-3 was additionally G convicted under Section 324 IPC. The two appellants before the High Court were acquitted_ of the charge under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 307 IPC respectively. The trial Court however held the third accused Hari Shankar H 132 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 8 S.C.R. A Singh @ Timal Singh guilty in terms of Section 324 IPC. But taking into consideration the your age instead of sentencing him directed him to be released on bail on executing interim bail bonds of Rs.2,000/- or two sureties of like amount. Only A-1 and A-3 preferred an appeal before the high Court. B 2. Prosecution version in a nutshell is as follows: A case was registered in Taraiya Police Station in the district of Chapra on 22nd July, 1987 on the basis of fard beyan (Ext-3) recorded by S. I. Dashrath Singh of Marhawrah P.S on C 21st July, 1987 at 10.30 p.m. in the State Dispensary on the statement of one Sharda Devi (P.W.4) wife of late Chintamani Singh of village Sarai, P.S. Taraya in the district of Saran. The informant had gone to Marhaura State Dispensary along with body of her husband who was seriously injured in an incident D and there her husband was declared dead by the doctor and on information, Police arrived and recorded her statement. She stated before the Police that on the same day at about 5.30 p.m. when she was in her house, she heard hulla. Thereafter, she came out and saw Bir Bahadur Singh Jaleshwar Singh and E Timal Singh of the same
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.