DEOKI NANDAN PRASAD, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Giridih in connection with S.T. No. 39 of 1986, whereby and whereunder the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellants under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for life.
(2.) PROSECUTION case lies in the narrow compass : that on 5.5.1985 in the evening the informant Rajendra Prasad Yadav alongwith his brother Arjun Yadav (deceased) was returning from Charki godown where they had gone to make payment and also to make payment to the labourers and when they reached near the demolished house of Nunu Singh then all the accused persons alongwith one Govind Raut and one unknown person came there and have surrounded them. Out of them, the appellants Ram Kumar Raut and Shyam Shankar Raut were armed with double barrel gun, Shankar Raut was holding a pistol in his hand, Jagdish Raut and Govind Raut were armed with lathi, Ashok Prasad was armed with farsa and Anil Prasad Yadav was having a sword whereas the unknown person was having a lathi in his hand. Accused Jagdish Raut demanded money from the informant upon which he stated that the money is with his brother Arjun Yadav. In the meantime, Jagdish Raut and Govind Raut caught hold the hands of the informant and Ram Kumar Raut and Shyam Sundar Raut caught hold of Arjun Yadav and demanded money whereas Arjun Yadav (deceased) told them that he had no money and thereafter Jagdish Raut ordered to kill him. Accused Ram Kumar Raut fired from his double barrel gun on Arjun Yadav which hit him on the chest and thereafter he fell down and thereafter accused Shyam Sunder Raut took out of Rs. 4510/ - from the pocket of Arjun Yadav and Shyam Sunder Raut also fired upon Arjun Yadav. Ashok Raut and Anil Raut also were holding the hands (if Arjun Yadav at the time of incident. Shankar Raut also assaulted with the pistol on the mouth of Arjun Yadav due to which his teeth were broken. Ram Kumar Raut further threatened the informant that the entire family of the informant would be done, to death if any information is lodged to the police. Arjun Yadav died at the spot and thereafter the accused and the unknown persons started to drag the dead body of Arjun Yadav whereupon the informant ran to the godown side raising alarm in order to get help to stop the appellants in taking away by dragging the dead body. Thereafter the informant with the help of labourers were able to stop the accused in taking away the dead body and they had left the dead body at a distance of 200 yards from the place of occurrence. It is alleged further that a wrist watch worth Rs. 600/ - was also missing from the hand of the deceased. The informant alongwith labourers brought the dead body to his residence at village Baghlariya and the dead body was kept on a cot. The chowkidar Kartik Turi was informed and the other villagers had also assembled after hearing the hulla. During the night due to fear of the accused persons, the informant did not go to the police station but in the morning when the informant alongwith chowkidar were going to the police station to lodge the first information report then he found one bullet and also five cartridge at the place of occurrence which they had also produced at the police station. It is also alleged that the said money, which were looted away by the accused persons, was taken by the deceased to the godown for the purpose of making payment to the labourers. Because they could reach the godown at late hours of the evening and, therefore, no payment was made to the labourers on that day and they were returning from the godown. Accordingly, the first information report was drawn up on the basis of the report of the informant and the FIR was registered under Section 396, IPC. The police investigated into the case and submitted charge -sheet against the appellants who appeared before the trial Court. Accordingly, charge was framed under Section 396, IPC against all the appellants, to which they pleaded not guilty. Witnesses were examined from both sides. After hearing both sides, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellants in the manner as stated above. On being aggrieved by the impugned judgment, the appellants preferred this appeal,
(3.) THE informant being the eye -witness claimed to have accompanied his brother Arjun Yadav (deceased) and alleged that the accused persons armed with double barrel guns, sword, lathi etc. surrounded them and they demanded money from them and thereafter they killed his brother Arjun Yadav by causing injury with the double barrel gun. He also claimed to had identified the appellants in the light of torch. According to the informant, the appellants tried to drag away the dead body but he raised hulla and with the help of labourers he could have stopped taking away the dead body by the accused persons.;