- (1.)The appellant herein and two others namely Bechan Paswan and Bibhakar mahto were charged for offence punishable under section 302/34 IPC for having committed murder of Devendra Mahto on 17th May 1984 at about 7.30 p. m. in village called Rasulpur.
(2.)Since Bibhakar Mahto was minor his trial was separated and it is on record that he was subsequently acquitted from the charge against him. Learned 7th additional sessions judge, Munger who tried the case of the appellant and Bechan paswan, found both of them guilty of the offence charged against them and convicted the appellant under section 302 and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment. He also convicted the said bechan Paswan under section 302 read with section 34 and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment. In appeal the high Court allowed the appeal of Bechan paswan and acquitted him of the charge while the appellant was found guilty of the offence charged against him and the sentence was affirmed. It is against the judgment of the High Court, the appellant is before us.
(3.)Mr. Gaurav Aggarwal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the evidence of eye witnesses pws 1, 2 and 5 is wholly artificial and could not be relied on. He also submitted that from the material on record it is clear that at the time of incident it was dark and there was no light at the place of incident. Therefore, the identification allegedly made by the said eye witnesses also cannot be relied upon. He further submitted the names of P. Ws. 1 and 5 do not find place in FIR and there is also inordinate delay in recording the statement of the witness. On these basis he argued that their evidence should be rejected.