SHANDAR ALIAS GUDDU Vs. STATE OF BIHAR (NOW JHARKHAND)
LAWS(JHAR)-2019-3-101
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on March 26,2019

SHANDAR ALIAS GUDDU Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF BIHAR (NOW JHARKHAND) Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Kailash Prasad Deo, J. - (1.) Heard, learned counsels for the appellants, Mr. Hemant Kumar Shikarwar assisted by Mrs. Shalini Kumari, Advocate [in Cri. Appeal (DB) No. 192 of 1996(R)], Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Malityar, Advocate [in Cri. Appeal (DB) No. 193 of 1996(R)] and Mr. Naveen Kr. Jaiswal, Advocate [in Cri. Appeal (DB) No. 197 of 1996(R)] and learned counsel for the State, Mr. Shekhar Sinha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
(2.) The present three criminal appeals are arising out of common judgment of conviction dated 03.09.1996 and order of sentence dated 07.09.1996, passed by learned VIth Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, in Sessions Trial No. 453 of 1989/T.R. 36 of 1996, whereby all these three appellants have been convicted for the offence committed and punishable under Section 393 read with sections 397 and 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. By the same impugned judgment Ram Bilas Malakar, who was also charged with these appellants have been acquitted by the learned trial Court by giving benefit of doubt. The learned trial Court has sentenced these three convicts to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years each for offence committed and punishable under Section 393 read with section 397 of the Indian Penal Code. However, all the sentences are directed to run concurrently.
(3.) The prosecution case, is based upon fardbeyan of the informant, Gopal Narayan Mathur (P.W.4) recorded by A.S.I., Suresh Singh of Gonda Town out post Bariyatu on 11.12.1988 at 22.30 hours at C.C.L. Hospital, Gandhi Nagar, whereby the informant has alleged that in the evening, the informant along with his wife and children were watching television in his house along with the tenant, residing in the upper floor, Mrs. Krishnan and her son, Ravi Krishnan. At 7.40 p.m., because of electrical load shedding, Ravi Krishnan, went to his house to study as television was not working. After five minutes informant heard the brawl raised by Ravi Krishnan as "bachao" "bachao". Thereafter all the persons climbed over the stairs. In the midway at the door of Mazumdar Saheb, informant saw Ravi Krishnan coming crumbling in pain and blood was oozing from his chest, who subsequently fell down. On being asked as to who has assaulted him, Ravi Krishnan has disclosed that three to four days ago, three persons, who had come to the house of accused Ram Bilas Malakar, residing in front of their house had committed the occurrence on the upper floor of the house. He has further stated that when he had seen those three persons in the house of accused Ram Bilas Malakar in suspicious condition three to four days ago, he had enquired their names from accused Ram Bilas Malakar and accused Ram Bilas Malakar had disclosed their names as Md. Shandar alias Guddu (appellant in Cri. Appeal (DB) No. 192 of 1996), Anil Malakar (appellant in Cri. Appeal (DB) No. 193 of 1996) and Md. Nasim Akhtar (appellant in Cri. Appeal (DB) No. 197 of 1996). Injured Ravi Krishnan has further disclosed that Anil Malakar was armed with a pistol, whereas Naseem and Guddu were armed with chhura. He has also disclosed that Anil and Guddu caught hold of him and asked him to take them to the lower floor but on his refusal, Naseem stabbed him and Ravi Krishnan ran down raising alarm. Thereafter, injured was taken to C.C.L. Hospital, Gandhi Nagar where he is under treatment. The informant could not disclose that what was the enmity prevailing there with the criminals who have assaulted Ravi Krishnan.;


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