LexRAM PRASAD SHARMA versus THE STATE OF BIHAR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
RAM PRASAD SHARMA v. THE STATE OF BIHAR July 30, 1969 A [S. M. SIKRI, G. K. MITTER ASD K. S. HEGDE, JJ.] B Evidence Act, s. 35- Conditions of admiss;bility under-Enrrits must be made by public official in the disclzarRe of his duties. Evidence-Apprecialion of-Name of murdered man wrongly men- riorud in F.l.R.--Does not lead to conclusion that hL was not 1n11rdered when identity established by other evidence, and mistake in 1· 4 .J,R. satis- faclorily explained. C The appellant was tried for an offence under s. 302 l.P.C. as well '1'1 for other offences in connection with an incident in which 11,1,·o persons were killed and several injured. 'fhe allegation against the appellant w31; that he caused the death of one K by shooting him wilh a gun in the course of the alleged incident. The Additional Sessions Judge who tried the case convicted the appellant for offence< under "· 326/ 149, 324/ 34, 201 and 148 l.P.C. but acquitted him in re51>CCI of the murdor of K. D In so doing he retied upon an allcsted copy filed by the defence which purported to be the copy of an entry in inc Chaukidar's hath chitha accord· ing to which K died three days before the alleged incident. He also relied on the fact that the name of K was not mentioned a5 a victim in the Finl Information Report of the incident. Jn .:appcaJ the High Court convicted the appellant under s. 304 l.P.C. for causing the death of K. holding that the alleged entry in the hath chitha had been wrongJy admitted in evidence E by the trial judge and that the deficiency in the F.J.R. was sufficiently explained. Appeal against the High Court's judgment was filed by special leave. Hl!LD : (i) The attested copy of the Chaukidar's halh chithn was not admissible in evidence because the entry in question was not proved to have been made by a public servant in the discharge of his dutie\. [699 El SaMran Stnanati v. Emperor, A.l.R. 1945 Pat. 489 and Brii 1'.ft>han Sin~h v. Priyc Brat Narain Sinha, (1965] 3 S.C.R. 861. .-lied on. (ii) K's death at the time and place alleged by the prosecution w:i~ established by sufficient evidence and the High Court •Nas right in accept- ing the explanation of the maker of the P.I.R. for the absence of K\ name therein. (699 Fl F CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. G 208 of 1966. Appeal by special leave from the judgmQilt and order dated February 22, 1966 of the Patna High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 530 of 1962 and Government Appeal No. 44 of 1962. A. S. R. Chari, M. K. Ramamurthl, G. Ramamurthy and H Vineet Kumar, for the appellant. B. P. Jha, for the respondent. A I! c ... D E F G H R. P. SHARMA v. BUIAR '(Sikri, I.) 695 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Sikri, J. Fourteen persons were tried by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur, on various charges. Out of these 14 persons Sheo Prasad Sharma and Ram Prasad Sharma were charged under s. 302, I.P .C. Sheo Prasad Sharma was charged under s. 302 for having intentionally caused tlu: death of Qudrat Mian by shooting him down with his gun whereas Ram Prasad Shanna was charged under this section for having shot down with his gun Kaleshwar Yadav and thus having caused the murder of this person. ; · ' The Second Additional Sessions· Judge, Bhagalpur, convicted Sheo Prasad Sharma under ss. 304, 324/34, 201 and 148 and sentenced him to seven years rigorous imprisomnent. The appel- lant, Ram Prasad Sharma was convicted under ss. 326/ 149, 324/ 34, 201 and 148, I.P.C. and sentenced to four years rigorous im- prisonment. Seven other accused were also convicted but it is not necessary to mention the sections under which they were convicted. Five of the accused persons were acquitted by the learned Second Additional Sessions J ~dge .. Two appeals were filed before the High Court, one by the State and the other by the nine convicted persons, including Ram Prasad Sharma. Both the appeals· were heard together. The High Court accepted the appeal of the State as far as Ram Prasad Sharma was concerned and convicted him under s. 304, I.P.C., in connection with the shooting an4 causing the death of Kaleshwar and sen- tenced him to rigorous imprisonment for seven years. The con- victions of seven others were altered from under ss. 326/149 to one under ss. 304/ 149 but the sentence of four years rigorous im- prisonment was maintained. In other respects the convictions were maintained. Th
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.