ANIL KUMAR SHARMA - (1.) IN these two connected appeals, the appellants have challenged the judgment and order dated 13.3.2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No.5, Ghazipur in S.T. No.224 of 2001 and S.T. No.226 of 2001, whereby, each appellant had been convicted for the offence punishable under section 302/34 IPC and sentenced undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5,000.00 each with default stipulation. However, accused Raj Kumar Rajbhar had been acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 4/25 of the Arms Act in S.T. No.226 of 2001.
(2.) THE prosecution story in nut shell is that in the evening of 20.7.2001 Ramkrit Rajbhar son of Ranjeet Rajbhar was going to return the SAGREE (Rickshaw Trolley) to co-villager Deepu. In the way in front of the house of Kuber Rajbhar accused Raj Kumar Rajbhar, Subhash Rajbhar and Tribhuwan Rajbhar tried to forcibly snatch the trolley from Ramkrit Rajbhar. Hearing the noise Chandra Dev Rajbhar rushed to the spot from his maize field and tried to pacify the dispute. Several other persons including Rajnath Rajbhar, Rajendra Rajbhar and Ram Briksha Rajbhar also arrived there. Accused Raj Kumar Rajbhar rushed to his house and soon returned back with a knife. Accused Tribhuwan Rajbhar caught the hands of Chandra Dev Rajbhar, while his hands were caught by accused Subhash Rajbhar, then Raj Kumar Rajbhar wielded 3-4 knife blows on Chandra Dev Rajbhar and leaving him injured they made their escape good. This incident took place at about 7.30 p. m. A gamchha was tied on the injuries of the injured and he was taken to Government Hospital, Manihari, where the doctor declared him dead. The complainant Lalta Rajbhar, uncle of the deceased leaving the dead body at the Hospital reached Police Station Shadiabad and lodged report of the incident the same night at 11.30 p.m. On the basis of this report a case under section 302 IPC was registered against accused Raj Kumar Rajbhar, Subhash Rajbhar and Tribhuwan Rajbhar at Case Crime No.188 of 2001, under section 302 IPC at the police station Shadiyabad and the investigation was taken up by J.P. Tiwari, Station Officer. After recording the statement of the head constable who registered the case and the complainant he reached at the Public Health Centre Manihari. On account of insufficient light inquest proceedings could not be carried out. On 21.7.2001, Panchnama was prepared by the Investigating Officer and along with the related papers the sealed dead body of the deceased was sent for postmortem examination. Dr. S.K.Rai on 21.7.2001 conducted autopsy upon the dead body of Chandra Dev Rai at 3.30 p.m. He found that 35-years old deceased had average built body. His eyes and mouth were closed. Rigor mortis was present in lower extremity and has passed from upper extremities. Abdomen was distended. Greenish discolouration was present in abdomen over caccum. Dr. Rai found the following ante-mortem injuries from the person of the deceased : 1. An incised wound size of 5 Cm. x 2 Cm.x abdomen cavity deep present. 8 Cm. below right nipple margins are clear. 2. An incised wound size of 3Cm. x 1 Cm. x muscle deep present on lateral aspect of left arm 10 Cm. below left shoulder. 3. An incised wound size of 2.5 Cm. x 1 Cm. x muscle deep on lateral aspect of chest 12 Cm. below left shoulder. In internal examination the doctor found that 8th and 9th ribs of the deceased were fractured. His right side heart was full while left was empty. 2.5 liter semi capsulated blood was found. The stomach was empty, peritoneum was incised. In large intestine fecal matters and gases were present. In the opinion of the doctor the deceased suffered death about one day before due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of ante mortem injury number no.1. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence on 21.7.2001 and took samples of simple blood stains from the scene of occurrence and prepared site plan. On 26.7.2001 accused Raj Kumar Rajbhar was arrested at 1.30 p.m. and he got a knife used in the offence recovered to the Investigation Officer. On the basis of the recovery memo of the knife a case at crime No.189 of 2001, under section 4/25 of the Arms Act was registered against the accused Raj Kumar Rajbhar. The investigation in both the cases ended in charge sheet against the accused persons. The Magistrate took cognizance against all the three accused persons on police charge-sheet under section 302/34 IPC and on separate charge-sheet cognizance was taken against accused Raj Kumar Rajbhar under section 4/25 of the Arms Act. After complying with the provisions of Section 209 CrPC the Magistrate committed the cases to the court of Session where they were registered in S.T. No.224 of 2001 against all the accused persons under section 302/34 IPC and in S.T. No.226 of 2001 was registered against the accused Raj Kumar Rajbhar under section 4/25 of the Arms Act. Both the cases were tried together.
(3.) AFTER committal of the cases to the Court of Session, the learned Sessions Judge framed charges under section 302/34 IPC against all the three accused persons and separate charge under section 4/25 of the Arms Act was prepared against the accused Raj Kumar Rajbhar. The accused persons abjured the guilt and claimed trial.;