BANARSI YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the revision applications were heard together as both arise out of the common judgment passed by 4th Addl. Sessions Judge, Nalanda at Biharsharif in Cr. Appeal No. 877 of 1990, whereby he dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioners who were convicted by the trial Court under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.

(2.) The relevant facts, concerning both the revision applications are that on 22.5.1989 the informant along with his son were returning from Bakhtiyarpur and were going to their village home and boarded on a Tumtum. The informant was carrying a D.B.B.L. gun bearing No. 7401723. When the Tumtum reached near the Chandi More at Harnaut Bazar, one of the accused who was boarding on Tumtum snatched away his gun and the three accused who were standing at the More helped him to accomplish his object. After snatching the gun, the accused-persons fled away and when the informant and his son chased them, the accused-persons hurled brick bats causing injuries to the informant and his son. The informant raised alarm but nobody came to his rescue. On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant recorded on 22.5.1989 a case under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code was registered at Harnaut police station against four unknown accused- persons. In course of investigation these petitioners were arrested on suspicion and were put on T.I. Parade and were identified by the informant and his son.

(3.) The petitioners faced trial and in course of trial the informant and his son fully supported the prosecution story and identified the petitioners. On the basis of the materials available on record, the trial Court found these petitioner guilty for committing the offence under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. Against the judgment of the trial Court, an appeal was preferred by the petitioners and the appellate Court, after considering the evidence, facts and circumstances of the case confirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved with that, the present revision applications have been filed.