SHAMBHU CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR
LAWS(PAT)-2022-12-47
HIGH COURT OF PATNA
Decided on December 23,2022

SHAMBHU CHOUDHARY Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF BIHAR Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. SANJAY SINGH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS. NALINI [REFERRED TO]
KEHARSINGH VS. STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION) [REFERRED TO]
JOHN PANDIAN VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
SHARAD BIRDHI CHAND SARDA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
HATE SINGH BHAGAT SINGH VS. STATE OF MADHYA BHARAT [REFERRED TO]
ALLAUDDIN MIAN SHARIF MIAN VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. SUKHDEVSINGH:SUKHDEV SINGH ALIAS SUKHA [REFERRED TO]
KANHAI MISHRA ALIAS KANHAIYA MISAR VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
SHIVA SHANKAR PANDEY VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA SHANTARAM TODANKAR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
PARSURAM PANDEY VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
POHLU VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
NAGARJIT AHIR VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
BALWAN SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
SYED IBRAHIM VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
PANDURANG CHANDRAKANT MHATRE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
AMERIKA RAI VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
KULDIP YADAV VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
KHAIRUDDIN VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
NALLABOTHU RAMULU @ SEETHARAMAIAH VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
GANESH DATT VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF M P VS. RATAN SINGH & ORS [REFERRED TO]
ANAND RAMACHANDRA CHOUGULE VS. SIDARAI LAXMAN CHOUGALA [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Criminal Appeal bearing No.418 of 2014 has been filed by appellant/accused No.1 Jai Kishore Choudhary and appellant/accused No.6 Ram Pravesh Choudhary. Criminal Appeal bearing No. 442 of 2014 has been filed by appellant/accused No.2 Kaushal Choudhary, appellant/accused No.4 Sudhir Choudhary, appellant/accused No.5 Sunil Choudhary and appellant/accused No.7 Upendra Choudhary. Criminal Appeal bearing No.494 of 2014 has been filed by appellant/accused No.3 Sambhu Choudhary. They all are convicted by the impugned judgment of offences punishable under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 149 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Sec. 27 of the Arms Act. For the offence punishable under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 149 of the IPC, each of them is sentence of suffer imprisonment for life apart from imposition of fine of Rs.1,000.00 (One Thousand) and default sentence of one month. Similar sentence is awarded to them for the offence punishable under Sec. 120B of the IPC. For the offence punishable under Sec. 27 of the Arms Act, they all are sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year apart from imposition of fine of Rs.1,000.00 (One Thousand) and default sentence of simple imprisonment for one month. These appellants along with acquitted accused No.8, Mukesh Choudhary had faced the subject trial during pendency of which another charge sheeted accused Balram Choudhary absconded and his trial was accordingly separated by the learned Trial Court. One more accused in the subject crime, namely, Tuntun Choudhary @ Chhotu Sukla is still facing trial for the subject crime. By these appeals, appellant/accused Nos.1 to 7 are challenging the said judgment and order dtd. 5/5/2014 and 7/5/2014 respectively, passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Begusarai in Sessions Trial No.461 of 2012/0005799 of 2013 by which they have been convicted and sentence as indicated above. As these appeals are arising out of the same trial and same judgment and order of conviction, these appeals are being decided by this common judgment.
(2.)Facts leading to the prosecution of the appellants who shall be referred to in their original capacity for the sake of convenience, projected from the police report are thus:
(A) PW 4 Manju Devi (the First Informant) along with her husband Ramashrey Choudhary (since deceased) as well as her two sons Binod Choudhary (PW 2), Awadh Choudhary (P.W.3) and daughter in law Bina Devi (P.W.1) used to reside in their house at village Akbarpur, Nayatola Dhanha falling under jurisdiction of Police Station Samho, District Begusarai. Accused persons were also resident of the same village. Subodh Choudhary " son of First Informant, Manju Devi and Ramashrey Choudhary (since deceased) was earlier murdered by accused persons and in that crime absconding accused Balram Choudhary was undergoing pre-trial detention. For getting said Balram Choudhary bailed out in the offence of commission of murder of Subodh Choudhary, the members of prosecuting party were being pressurized to withdraw the said prosecution. However, as members of the prosecuting party were not acceding to the said direction of the accused persons, absconding accused Balram Choudhary, who at the relevant time was in jail had conspired with acquitted accused No.8 Mukesh Choudhary as well as other accused persons and by hatching the conspiracy, Ramashrey Choudhary was done to death in the following manner at his house at about 7:00 to 7:30 P.M. of 8/5/2011 by the accused persons as well as absconding accused Balram Choudhary, deceased accused Chandrashekhar Choudhary and the accused who is still facing trial, namely, Tuntun Choudhary @ Chhotu Sukla.

(B) Deceased Ramashrey Choudhary along with his wife Manju Devi (P.W.4), his sons Binod Choudhary (P.W.2), Awadh Choudhary (P.W.3) and daughter-in-law Bina Devi (P.W.1) were sitting in the courtyard of their house in the evening hours of 8/5/2011. The lantern was burning in that courtyard.

(C) At about 7:00 to 7:30 P.M. of that day i.e., 8/5/2011 all the accused persons and others came at the 'Aangan' of the house of the prosecuting party. They were armed with rifles and guns. Upon seeing them, P.W.2 Binod Choudhary and P.W.3 Awadh Kishore Choudhary managed to hide themselves behind the gunny bags kept in front of the wall of the house. The accused persons and others started questioning P.W.4 Manju Devi as to whereabouts of her sons as well as her husband. P.W.4, Manju Devi and her daughter-in-law P.W.1 Bina Devi then retorted by saying that Subodh Kumar has already been killed by them.

(D) Deceased accused Chandrashekhar Choudhary then exhorted to kill Ramashrey Choudhary who was sitting at the western side of Darwaja. In order to carry out that order, accused persons encircled Ramashrey Choudhary and under orders of deceased accused Chandrashekhar Choudhary, Tuntun Choudhary @ Chhotu Sukla fired a bullet at the chest of Ramashrey Choudhary. Appellant accused No.3 Sambhu Choudhary then fired another bullet at Ramashrey Choudhary. Upon being hit by the bullets, Ramashrey Choudhary fell down with bleeding injuries on his person and died instantaneously. Thereafter, all accused persons while firing bullets ran away from the spot of the incident.

(E) P.W.6 Karu Yadav, Police Station Officer of Police Station Samho received information regarding murder of a person at village Dhanah and accordingly he rushed at the village. He met P.W.4 Manju Devi at her Darwaja at about 8:00 P.M. of 8/5/2011 and recorded her first information report which was also signed as witnesses by her sons P.W.2 Binod and P.W.3 Awadh Choudhary. By going back to the Police Station, P.W.6 Karu Yadav, PSI has registered offence vide Crime No. 21 of 2011 by drawing formal FIR. He took up investigation of the subject crime. P.W.6 Karu Yadav, PSI then inspected dead body of Ramashrey Choudhary and prepared inquest report Exhibit-6. He seized empty cartridges vide seizure memo Exhibit-7. The dead body was sent for autopsy and P.W.5 Dr. Ramesh Prasad, Medical Officer of the Sadar Hospital, Begusarai, conducted post mortem examination on the said dead body of Ramashrey Choudhary on 9/5/2011 and recorded the report of post mortem examination (Exhibit-3).

(F) Routine investigation followed. Statement of witnesses came to be recorded. On completion of investigation, the appellant/accused along with absconding accused Balram Choudhary and acquitted accused Mukesh Choudhary came to be charge sheeted. During the course of investigation, accused Chandrashekhar Choudhary died. As stated above, Tuntun Choudhary @ Chhotu Sukla is being tried vide separate sessions case.

(3.)The learned Trial Court was pleased to frame the charge and the same was read over and explained to the accused persons. They pleaded not guilty and claim trial.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.