Suraj Mahto vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 1189 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                      CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 143 of 2020
         Arising Out of PS Case No.-2 Year-2014 Thana- BHAGWANPUR District- Vaishali
     ======================================================

1. Suraj Mahto, aged about 26 years, Male Son of Ashok Mahto.

2. Bishwa Karma Mahto, aged about 24 years, Male Son of Late Ram Prasad Mahto.

3. Nunuwati Devi, aged about 42 years, Female Wife of Ashok Mahto.

All resident of Village- Pratap Tarnd (Kahar Toli), PS- Bhaganpur, District- Vaishali.

... ... Appellant/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

     For the Appellant/s     :       Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
     For the State           :       Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh, APP
     For the Informant       :       Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi, Advocate

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 02-03-2021

Heard Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for

the appellants; Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State

and Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi, learned counsel for the

informant.

2. The appeal has been filed against the judgment of

conviction dated 12.12.2019 and order of sentence dated

19.12.2019 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions

Judge, IXth, Vaishali at Hajipur, in Sessions Trial No. 413+ 414 of

2014 arising out of Bhagwanpur PS Case No. 02 of 2014, by

which the appellants have been convicted under Sections 304/34 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.143 of 2020 dt.02-03-2021

of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years

and to pay fine of Rs. 50,000/-each, out of which ordered to pay

Rs. 1,20,000/- to the informant and the rest of total amount of fine

Rs. 30,000/- deposited with the State Government and in default

of payment of fine of Rs. 30,000/-, the appellants were directed to

undergo imprisonment for a further period of six months simple

imprisonment and for recovery of Rs. 1,20,000/-

movable/immovable property of appellants shall be confiscated.

3. Presently, the prayer is for suspension of sentence and

grant of bail to the appellants.

4. The allegation against appellants no. 1 and 2 is

general and omnibus of being party to the assault on the deceased

whereas against appellant no. 3 is that she was the order giver.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that

against co-accused Rudal Mahto the specific allegation is of

assault on the head and in the postmortem, there is swelling of

6"x4" on the left forehead, but against the appellants, there is no

direct allegation of any assault and though one more injury of

fracture of rib has been found but it is on the right side which

clearly indicates that after being hit on the head, the deceased fell

down on the other side leading to fracture of his ribs. It was

further submitted that none of the witnesses have specifically Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.143 of 2020 dt.02-03-2021

stated that any of the appellants had assaulted on the chest so as to

corroborate the injury of fracture of ribs on the right side of the

deceased. Learned counsel submitted that the doctor in his

deposition has stated that such injury was not sufficient to cause

death and that is why conviction has not been under Section 302

of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel submitted that the

appellants no. 1 and 2 are in custody for 18 months whereas the

appellant no. 3 was granted anticipatory bail during trial and after

the date of the judgment is in custody for about 15 months.

6. Learned APP submitted that the Court below has

considered the matter and has passed the order of conviction.

7. Learned counsel for the informant also supported the

judgment of the Court below. It was submitted that witnesses have

supported the role of the appellants. However, he could not point

out any deposition of any witness wherein specific overt act of

assault on the chest of the deceased has been pointed out and

further that the injuries do not reflect any repeated or multiple

blows on any other part of the body. Further, he could not

controvert or show that there was any injury on the body and only

the fracture of the ribs has been noted in the postmortem report.

8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, during the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.143 of 2020 dt.02-03-2021

pendency of the appeal, the sentence of the appellants named

above, is suspended and they shall be released on bail, on their

furnishing bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) each with

two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, IXth, Vaishali at

Hajipur in Sessions Trial No. 413+ 414 of 2014 arising out of

Bhagwanpur PS Case No. 02 of 2014, subject to the condition that

one of the bailors shall be the close relative of the appellants.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR U T