Sunni Kumar @ Sunni Dewal vs The State Of Bihar
2023 Latest Caselaw 5325 Patna

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                 CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.636 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-613 Year-2015 Thana- BEGUSARAI TOWN District- Begusarai
======================================================

Sunni Kumar @ Sunni Dewal S/o Rajendra Das, R/o Village- Ratanpur, P.S.- Begusarai Town Ratanpur, Dist- Begusarai.

... ... Appellant/s Versus The State Of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 541 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-613 Year-2015 Thana- BEGUSARAI TOWN District- Begusarai ====================================================== Sonu Kumar S/o Kismat Das R/o-Village-Ratanpur, P.S.-Begusarai Town Ratanpur Dist.-Begusarai.

... ... Appellant/s Versus The State Of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 636 of 2018) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Murlidhar Mishra, Advocate Mr.Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sri Satya Narayan Prasad, A.P.P. (In CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 541 of 2018) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Murlidhar Mishra, Advocate Mr.Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sri Ajay Mishra, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI)

Date : 13-10-2023

Both these appeals are filed under Section- 374(2) of

the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter

referred to as the 'Code') against the judgment of conviction

dated 31.03.2018 and order of sentence dated 06.04.2018

rendered by 7th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Begusarai, Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

in connection with S. Tr. No.320 of 2016, arising out of

Begusarai Town P.S. Case No.613 of 2015, whereby both these

appellants have been convicted for the offences punishable

under Sections 302/34 of I.P.C. and 27 of the Arms Actand

sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of

Rs.20,000/- and in default of payment of fine 08 months S.I., for

Section 27 of the Arms Act directed to undergo 4 years and to

pay Rs.-4000/- in default has to serve more 4 months S.I.

2. Against the aforesaid judgment and order, two

different convicts have filed two separate appeals. However,

learned counsel Mr. Murlidhar Mishra appears on behalf of the

appellants in both these appeals.

3. The prosecution case in brief is as under:-

"On 01.11.2015, the husband of the informant, deceased Sanjeet Kumar at about 08:00 a.m. went to obey the call of nature to the field towards south of the house when accused Sunni Kumar @ Sunni Dewal, son of Rajo Das, accused Sonu Kumar, son of Kismat Das and Munna Sah, son of Ajit Sah, all residents of Ratanpur came to the said field, fired at her husband and fled away towards southern direction. On hearing the sound of firing, the informant and other villagers rushed to the field. By that time, all the three miscreants had fled away. When the informant reached near her husband along with Basdeo Das, son of Babloo Das and Ashok Das, son of Ramchandra Das and other villagers, the husband of the informant was Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

languishing in pain lying on the ground. Then he was taken to the Sadar Hospital, Begusarai on a cart Thela. On the way to the hospital, her husband died. On the way itself, the deceased informed that out of the three, it was Sunni Kumar who fired at him. Sunni Kumar always used to quarrel claiming a piece of land. There was land dispute for last one year approximately, because of which Sunni Kumar and his accomplices committed the said incident."

4. On the basis of the information given by the

informant, F.I.R. bearing Begusarai Town P.S. Case No. 613 of

2015 came to be registered with Begusarai Town Police Station

for the alleged offences punishable under Section 302 read with

Section 34 of the I.P.C. and under Section 27 of the Arms Act,

1959. As the case was exclusively triable by Court of Sessions,

the concerned Magistrate committed the same to the Sessions

Court where the same was registered as Sessions Trial No. 320

of 2016.

5. After registration of the F.I.R., the Investigating

Agency carried out the investigation and during course of the

investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of

the witnesses. Dead body of the deceased was sent for post

mortem and after the investigation was over, the Investigating

Officer filed the charge-sheet against the present appellants.

6. At the outset, it is pertinent to note that Cr. Appeal Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

(DB) No.636 of 2018 was listed on board for considering the

request for grant of bail and for suspension of the sentence on 9 th

October, 2023. However, at that time learned counsel for the

appellant pointed out that appellant Sunni Kumar @ Sunni

Dewal is in custody since last more than 7 years and 11 months,

i.e. approximately 8 years and, therefore, instead of considering

the prayer for grant of bail, this Court may take up the appeal

itself for hearing and final disposal. It was also pointed out by

the learned counsel that the appellant of Cr. Appeal (DB)

No.541 of 2018 namely Sonu Kumar is also in custody since

last approximately six years and a half and, therefore, both the

appeals are taken up for final disposal.

7. Learned A.P.P's. appearing for the respondent

State have also requested that, as the concerned appellant is in

custody since last approximately 8 years, both these appeals be

heard together and finally disposed of.

8. In pursuance of the request made by the learned

counsel appearing for the parties and considering the fact that

appellants are in custody since approximately 8 years, the Office

was directed to list both these appeals for hearing.

9. Heard Mr. Murlidhar Mishra, learned counsel

appearing for the appellants in both the appeals and Mr. Satya Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

Narayan Prasad, learned A.P.P. for the respondent State in Cr.

Appeal (DB) No.636 of 2018 and Mr. Ajay Mishra, learned

A.P.P. for the respondent State in Cr. Appeal (DB) No.541 of

2018.

10. Learned advocate for the appellants would

mainly submit that, in fact, there is no eye-witness to the

occurrence in question and the prosecution has projected only

near relatives of the deceased as eye-witnesses. It is submitted

that the fardbeyan was given by the wife of the deceased,

namely Rupam Kumari (P.W. 6). As per her deposition, on

hearing the sound of firing, she reached to the field. At that

time, she saw that her husband got fire-arm injuries on his

abdomen and he was found dead. When inquired, one Ashok

Das, elder brother-in-law of the said witness, informed her that

one Sunni Kumar @ Sunni Dewal shot him dead. Thereafter, the

deceased was taken to the hospital where she gave her

fardbeyan. However, at this stage, learned counsel referred the

deposition of P.W.1 and other prosecution-witnesses and

submitted that though P.W.1, who is father of the deceased, was

not present, he has stated before the Court that he is an eye-

witness to the occurrence. The said witness has stated that

Sanjeet (deceased) stated that Sunni shot at him and while he Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

was taken to the hospital, on the way he succumbed to the

injuries. Learned counsel, at this stage, has also referred the

deposition of P.W. 3 Ashok Das, who, in fact, has stated that

when he reached at the place of occurrence, wife of Sanjeet

informed him about the incident/occurrence. Thus, learned

counsel submitted that there is no eye-witness to the occurrence

in question and all the prosecution-witnesses are the chance

witnesses who are near relatives of the deceased. Thus, the

deposition given by the said witnesses is not trustworthy.

10.1 It is further submitted that the prosecution has

also failed to prove the motive on the part of the appellants to

kill the deceased. It is the case of the prosecution that because of

the land dispute, the appellants killed the deceased. However, it

is reflected from the deposition of the prosecution-witnesses that

deceased was not the owner of any land and the Investigating

Officer has also not inquired with regard to the so-called land

dispute between the parties. It is also submitted that no dispute

was pending in any court with regard to the land between the

parties. Learned counsel, therefore, urged that the prosecution

has also failed to prove the said aspect before the trial Court

despite which the trial court has recorded the order of

conviction.

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

10.2 It is thereafter contended by the learned counsel

for the appellants that the place of occurrence is also not

ascertained by the Investigating Officer. Learned counsel has

also pointed out major contradiction in the deposition of the

prosecution-witnesses and thereafter contended that the present

appellants have been falsely implicated in the occurrence in

question and, therefore, the impugned judgment and order be

quashed and set aside and thereby both these appellants be

acquitted.

11. On the other hand, learned A.P.P's. appearing for

the respondent State in the respective appeals have vehemently

opposed these appeals. They mainly contended that, after

referring to the deposition of the witnesses that they are eye-

witnesses to the occurrence in question and they have

specifically deposed before the Court that they have seen both

the appellants at the place of occurrence and Sunni Kumar

opened fire from his pistol in which Sanjeet (deceased)

sustained injuries, it is submitted that the case of the eye-

witnesses is supported by the medical evidence. It is also

submitted that oral dying declaration was given by Sanjeet

(deceased) before P.W. 2, who is uncle of the deceased, when

the uncle reached immediately at the place of occurrence. It is, Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

therefore, urged that when the prosecution has proved the case

against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt, the trial court

has not committed any error while recording the order of

conviction against the appellants. Learned A.P.P's., therefore,

urged that both these appeals be dismissed.

12. We have considered the submissions canvassed

by the learned counsel appearing for the parties. We have also

perused the evidence produced by the prosecution before the

concerned trial court.

13. It would emerge from the record that P.W. 6

Rupam Kumari is the informant whose fardbeyan was recorded

in the hospital by S.I. Rakesh Kumar who has not been

examined by the prosecution, wherein the informant has stated

that on 01.11.2015, the husband of the informant, deceased

Sanjeet Kumar at about 08:00 a.m. went to obey the call of

nature to the field towards south of the house when accused

Sunni Kumar @ Sunni Dewal, son of Rajo Das, accused Sonu

Kumar, son of Kismat Das and Munna Sah, son of Ajit Sah, all

residents of Ratanpur came to the said field, fired at her husband

and fled away towards southern direction. On hearing the sound

of firing, the informant and other villagers rushed to the field.

By that time, all the three miscreants had fled away. When the Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

informant reached near her husband along with Basdeo Das, son

of Babloo Das and Ashok Das, son of Ramchandra Das and

other villagers, the husband of the informant was languishing in

pain lying on the ground. Then he was taken to the Sadar

Hospital, Begusarai on a cart Thela. On the way to the hospital,

her husband died. On the way itself, the deceased informed that

out of the three, it was Sunni Kumar who fired at him. Sunni

Kumar always used to quarrel claiming a piece of land. There

was land dispute for last one year approximately, because of

which Sunni Kumar and his accomplices committed the said

incident.

14. P.W. 6 Rupam Kumari, in her examination-in-

chief before the Court, has stated that on 01.11.2015, at about

08:00 a.m. in the morning, she was present at her house. At that

time, she heard the sound of firing. Therefore, she immediately

had gone to the agriculture field and saw that her husband

sustained gun-shot injuries on his abdomen and he was found

dead. Thereafter, he was taken to the hospital at Begusarai.

When she inquired, one Ashok Das, who is her elder brother-in-

law, informed her that one Sunni Kumar opened fire in which

her husband sustained gun-shot injury. Her statement was

recorded by Darogaji in the hospital and she had signed the said Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

fardbeyan.

14.1 During cross-examination, the said witness has

specifically admitted that she had stated that Shiv Das is her

father-in-law. At the time of occurrence, he was at Ranchi. She

had further admitted that she along with her uncle-in-law and

mother-in-law had gone to the agriculture field.

15. P.W. 1 Shiv Das, who is father of the deceased,

has stated in the examination-in-chief, that on 01.11.2015, at

08:00 a.m., the occurrence took place. At that time, he was

present at his agriculture field. At that time, he saw that Sonu

and Munna were using filthy/abusive language. At that time,

Sunni came at the place of occurrence and opened fire and in the

said firing Sanjeet sustained fire-arm injury on his chest.

Thereafter, all the accused fled away from the spot. Sanjeet was

taken to the hospital at Begusarai and on the way Sanjeet stated

that Sunni shot at him. Thereafter, on the way Sanjeet

succumbed to the injuries. Police came to the hospital. The said

witness identified Sunni and Sonu who were present in the

Court.

15.1 During cross-examination, the said witness has

specifically admitted that he is not having any land-dispute with

anybody and he is not possessing any land. He has further stated Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

that he was cutting grass in the field. He has not shown the sale-

deed to the police. The distance between the place where he was

cutting grass and where the occurrence took place is 10 steps.

The said witness further stated in the cross-examination that

when he had shouted, his daughter-in-law came at the place of

occurrence from the house. At that time, his wife was also

present in the field. Police did not seize the blood stained clothe

of his son. He had also not shown the place where he was

working, to the police. His son had gone to the field to obey the

call of nature. However, the police did not seize the water pot

which he was carrying. The said witness further stated in the

cross-examination that, in his statement given before the police,

he had not stated that Sonu asked Sunni to open fire. The said

witness further admitted in the cross-examination that when he

reached near his son, he came to know that his son had become

unconscious. However, he regained consciousness after five

minutes and thereafter he stated that Sunni shot at him. The

Investigating Officer also did not collect the blood stained soil

from the place of occurrence. He further stated that there was no

dispute with Sonu.

16. P.W. 2 Basudeo Das is the uncle of the deceased.

The said witness, in his examination-in-chief, has stated that he Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

was present at about 08:00 a.m. in the agriculture field. At that

time, Sanjeet had gone for call of nature in the field. At that

moment, Sunni, Sonu and Monu came at the place of occurrence

and used abusive language. Thereafter, Sunni took out the pistol

and fired at Sanjeet. At that time, Sonu asked him to kill

Sanjeet. In the said occurrence Sanjeet sustained gun-shot injury

on his chest. When he reached near Sanjeet, Sanjeet informed

him that Sunni had shot at him.

16.1 In the cross-examination, the said witness has

stated that he did not hear the sound of firing when he was

working in the agriculture field. However, after hearing Hulla

when he reached near the place of occurrence, he heard the

sound of firing. He further stated that Sanjeet died on the way to

the hospital. He further stated that the wife of the deceased

became unconscious and she regained consciousness after two

days.

17. P.W. 3 Ashok Das, though as per the informant is

the elder brother-in-law of the informant, in fact, he is one of the

villagers. The said witness has deposed that he heard the sound

of firing and reached at the place of occurrence. At that time, he

saw the dead body of Sanjeet and wife of Sanjeet informed him

that Sunni Dewal fired at her husband. He has identified Sonu Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

and Sunni Dewal who were present in the Court.

17.1 During cross-examination, the said witness has

also admitted that on the date of occurrence Shiv Das, who is

father of the deceased, was in Ranchi. Said witness has admitted

that he had not seen any other person working in the agriculture

field. After seeing the occurrence, he gave information to the

house of Shiv Das. He has further admitted that the family

members of Shiv Das came at the place of occurrence after 10

minutes. He has further admitted that when he reached at the

place of occurrence, nobody else was present.

18. P.W. 4 Ghurni Devi is the mother-in-law of the

informant. The said witness in her examination-in-chief has

stated that the occurrence took place at 08:00 a.m. At that time,

she was cutting grass in the agriculture field. At that time, all the

three accused Sunni, Sonu and Munna were using abusive

language. At that time, Sonu said "Kill Sanjeet" and, therefore,

Sunni opened fire and in the said firing Sanjeet sustained injury

on the chest. Thereafter all the three accused fled away from the

place of occurrence. It is further stated that the son of the said

witness was taken to the hospital and on the way to the hospital

he succumbed to the injuries. Said witness also stated that the

land-dispute was going on with Sunni, as a result of which all Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

the accused killed her son. The said witness identified the

accused who were present in the Court.

18.1 During cross-examination, the said witness has

admitted that at the time of occurrence nobody was present in

the field. When she reached at the place of occurrence, her son

was lying and thereafter her brother-in-law, husband and

daughter-in-law came at the place. She has further stated that

her daughter-in-law became unconscious and she regained

consciousness on the next day. Said witness further admitted

that any case with regard to the land-dispute was not pending

before any Court. She has further admitted that there is a toilet

in her house. However, the same is used only by lady members

of the family. She has further admitted that there was no enmity

or any dispute with Sonu. She has also stated that she did not get

any information with regard to the occurrence from her husband

or from any other member of the family.

19. P.W. 5 Dr. Diwakar Singh was posted at Sadar

Hospital, Begusarai as Medical Officer. The said witness had

performed the post mortem of the dead body of deceased

Sanjeet and he found the following external injuries:-

"Rigor Mortis was present on eyelid and neck only,

Rigor Mortis was absent in upper and lower limbs. Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

(i) Wound of entry ovally shaped with inverted

margin charring tattooing about 4" in diameter.

Size 1/2" over mid line of back at level of D6

vertebrae.

On dissection track of bullet passed slightly on

obliquely and anteriorly lacerating muscle of back, fracturing

D5 vertebrae and lacerating spinal cord, left lung pericardium,

major vessels hard and blood was found in thoracic cavity. One

bullet was received from the chamber of heart, sealed it in clean

glass jar and handed over to accompanying police personal.

X-ray of chest was advised and done at Sadar

Hospital, Begusarai. X-ray plate shows foreign bodies

simulating as Bullet in left side of chest.

Liver, spleen, both kidney were found pale, blood

was present in stomach, small and large intestine within normal

limit.

Urinary Bladder was empty, blood was present in

trachea.

Time elapsed since death- two to three hours.

Cause of death- Due to hemorrhagic and cardiogenic

shock, produced by above mentioned injuries as a result of fire

arm."

Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

19.1 The said witness has stated in the cross-

examination that only one entry wound was found and the said

injury was due to firing from close range.

20. P.W. 7 Pawan Kumar Singh is the Investigating

Officer who had carried out the investigation. The said witness

has deposed before the Court that he had recorded the

statements of witnesses, visited the place of occurrence,

collected the necessary material evidence and thereafter filed the

charge-sheet against the present two appellants.

20.1 During cross-examination, said witness has

stated that information with regard to the death of the deceased

was received, which was registered in the station diary. He has

further stated that he did not find any grass which was cut at the

place of occurrence. There was no land of the informant near the

place of occurrence. He has not inquired into with regard to the

land dispute between the parties. He has further stated that he

did not find anybody at the place of occurrence nor he had

seized clothes of the deceased. He has further admitted that he

did not seize any blood-stained soil from the place of

occurrence.

21. P.W. 8 Amit Kumar is another police officer who

has carried out the investigation and arrested the accused and Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

filed charge-sheet against them.

22. The defence has also examined two defence

witnesses. Both the said defence witnesses have stated that

immediately after hearing the sound of firing they reached the

place of occurrence and when they reached, one Ashok Das and

Neeraj were present. However, they have not seen the accused at

the said place nor any other person was present.

23. From the aforesaid evidence led by the

prosecution before the Trial Court, it is revealed that P.W.6

Rupam Kumari is the informant whose fardbeyan was recorded

in the hospital by S.I. Rakesh Kumar. However, the said police

officer has not been examined by the prosecution. It is further

revealed that on the date of occurrence, she was present at her

house at 08:00 a.m. and after hearing the sound of firing, she

immediately rushed to the agriculture field and saw that her

husband sustained gun-shot injury on his abdomen and he was

found dead. The said witness further stated that when she

inquired, one Ashok Das, who is elder brother-in-law, informed

that Sunni Kumar opened fire in which her husband sustained

gun-shot injury, though from this deposition of P.W.6, it is

revealed that she is not the eye-witness to the occurrence and

the information was given to her about the assailants by one Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

Ashok Das, i.e., P.W.3.

23.1. At this stage, It is pertinent to note that P.W.3

Ashok Das in his deposition stated that he heard the sound of

firing and reached at the place of occurrence. At that time, he

saw the dead body of Sanjeet and wife of Sanjeet informed him

that Sunni Dewal fired at her husband. Thus, from this

deposition, it can be said that Ashok Das is also not an eye-

witness to the occurrence and there is major inconsistencies in

the story put forward by the prosecution through the aforesaid

witnesses. It is further revealed that, as per the deposition of

both the aforesaid witnesses, when they reached at the place of

occurrence, they found Sanjeet dead.

24. At this stage, we would like to observe that

P.W.6, during the course of her cross-examination, has

specifically stated that Shiv Das, her father-in-law, at the time of

occurrence was in Ranchi. The said witness further admitted

that she along with her uncle-in-law and mother-in-law had

gone to the agriculture field.

24.1. Now, from the deposition of P.W.1 Shiv Das, it

is revealed that the said witness has tried to project himself as an

eye-witness to the occurrence and he has narrated the

occurrence as if he had seen the incident in question. However, Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

as observed hereinabove, P.W.6 as well as P.W.3 Ashok Das

both have specifically stated during their cross-examination that

Shiv Das was in Ranchi on the date of occurrence. Further, from

the cross-examination of P.W.3, it is further revealed that when

he reached at the place of occurrence, family members of Shiv

Das came at the place after ten minutes and when he reached at

the said place, nobody else was present. Thus, from the

aforesaid deposition of P.W.6 and P.W.3, it would emerge that

P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.4 are not the eye-witnesses to the

occurrence despite which they projected themselves as eye-

witnesses. Further, as per P.W.6 and P.W.3, when they reached at

the place of occurrence, they found Sanjeet dead whereas as per

P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.4, when they reached at the place of

occurrence and when Sanjeet was taken to the hospital, on the

way, he informed about the name of the assailants and the role

played by the assailants, i.e., the present appellants. We are of

the view that in view of the deposition given by P.W.6 and

P.W.3, the so called story of oral dying declaration of deceased

before P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.4 cannot be believed. Further, there

are major contradictions in the depositions of the prosecution

witnesses.

25. The prosecution has attributed the motive on the Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

part of the appellants to kill the deceased by stating that there

was a land dispute between P.W.1, i.e., father of the deceased

and one of the appellants as a result of which, the occurrence

took place. However, from the deposition given by P.W.1, it

would emerge that the said witness has specifically stated during

cross-examination that he is not having any land dispute with

anybody and he does not possess any land. He had also not

shown any sale deed to the police. Further, the Investigating

Officer, P.W.7 Pawan Kumar Singh stated during his cross-

examination that that there is no land of the informant near the

place of occurrence and he had not inquired with regard to the

land dispute between the parties. P.W.4, who is mother of the

deceased, has also admitted during cross-examination that no

case with regard to the land dispute was pending before any

court and there was no enmity or dispute with Sonu (appellant).

Thus, from the aforesaid evidence of the prosecution, we are of

the view that the prosecution has also failed to prove the motive

on the part of the appellants to commit the alleged offences.

26. In view of the aforesaid discussions, we are of

the view that the prosecution has failed to prove the case against

the appellants beyond reasonable doubt despite which the Trial

Court has recorded the order of conviction against the appellants Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.636 of 2018 dt.13-10-2023

and thereby committed grave error which requires interference

in the present appeals.

27. Accordingly, both these appeals stand allowed.

The impugned judgment of conviction dated 31.03.2018 and

order of sentence dated 06.04.2018 passed by learned 7 th

Additional District & Sessions Judge, Begusarai in connection

with Sessions Trial No.320/2016, arising out of Begusarai Town

P.S. Case No.613 of 2015 is quashed and set aside. The

appellant, namely, Sunni Kumar @ Sunni Dewal in Criminal

Appeal (DB) No.636 of 2018 and appellant, namely, Sonu

Kumar in Criminal Appeal (DB) No.541 of 2018 are acquitted

of the charges levelled against them by the learned trial court.

Since both the appellants, named above, are in jail, they are

directed to be released forthwith, if their presence is not

required in any other case.

(Vipul M. Pancholi, J.)

( Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)

K.C.Jha/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          19.10.2023
Transmission Date       19.10.2023