RAMU AHIR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants have impugned the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 1.6.1993 passed by 7th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Rarichi in Sessions Trial No. 120/88, by reason of which these appellants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years under Section 326 read with Section 149 IPC and six months rigorous imprisonment for offence under Section 147 IPC.

(2.) IT is pertinent to mention that accused Jaipal Ahir though was found guilty for an offence under Sections 147, 326 read with Section 149 IPC, has been sentenced for the period already undergone.

(3.) IN order to prove its case, five prosecution witnesses were examined by the prosecution, though admittedly there were 12 chargesheet witnesses. PW 1, K.P. Srivastava is the doctor, who held post mortem examination on the dead body of Manbahal Singh. PW 2, Charku Singh is one of the sons of the deceased. PW 3, Sadhu Singh, another son of the deceased, is the informant. PW 4, Jagdeo Singh, is the cousin of PWs 2 and 3 and PW 5 is Jagarnath Ram, a formal witness. The Investigating Officer has not been examined in this case. FIR has been marked as Ext. 3, whereas Ext. 2 to 2/2 are the signatures of the informant and other witnesses on the FIR. Inquest report is Ext. 4 and injury report sent by the I.O. alongwith injured persons are Ext, 5 and 5/1. On behalf of the defence, injury report of Jagdeo Singh was proved and marked as Ext. A. FIR of the counter case lodged by one Barna Oraon on 19.9.1983 against PWs 2, 3 and 4 is Ext. B.