Sunil Yadav vs The State of Bihar

Appellant Sunil Yadav has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 307 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven

years as well as to pay fine appertaining to Rs.50,000/- and in default thereof, to undergo R.I. for three years, additionally vide judgment of conviction

dated 21.07.2015 and order of sentence dated 28.07.2015 passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Purnia in Sessions Trial No.421 of 2001/ 63 of

2015.

PW-6, Birendra Yadav, gave his fard-bayan on 16.01.2000 at about 4.00 p.m. while he along with his brother Amrendra Yadav were undergoing

treatment at State Dispensary Kumar-Khand alleging inter alia that during course of weeding of his maize crop, his elder brother Rajendra Yadav

came and protested, whereupon an altercation took place. During course thereof, he was joined by his sons Sunil Yadav armed with spade, Anil

Yadav armed with farsa and Suman Yadav armed with lathi. On an order of Rajendra Yadav, Sunil Yadav gave spade blow over head of Amrendra

Yadav causing severe injury. He was assaulted with farsa by Sunil Yadav causing injury over his head. Then thereafter, they both were assaulted by

lathi, brutally as a result of which, they both became unconscious. They were lifted to hospital by their villagers where they remained unconscious for

two days. His brother is still senseless. Nirmal Yadav and Fulendra Prasad Yadav stood as F.I.R. attesting witness.

On the basis of the aforesaid fard-bayan, Banmankhi (Jankinagar) P. S. Case No.23 of 2000 was registered followed with an investigation as well

as submission of chargesheet, facilitating the trial, meeting with the ultimate result, subject matter of instant appeal.

Defence case, as is evident from mode of cross-examination as well as statement under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. is that of complete denial.

Neither ocular nor documentary evidence has been adduced in defence, though on the point of compromise, which subsequently been existed in

between the parties, two DWs have been examined.

In order to substantiate its case, prosecution had examined altogether eight PWs, who are PW-1 Ghana Yadav, PW-2 Bilat Yadav, PW-3 Fulendra

Prasad Yadav, PW-4 Amrendra Yadav, PW-5 Ratan Yadav, PW-6 Birendra Yadav, PW-7 Dr. Bindeshwari Prasad Shah and PW-8 Tribhuvan

Bhagat, the I.O. Side by side, had also exhibited signature of PW-3 over F.I.R. as Exhibit-1, signature of informant over fard-bayan as Exhibit-1/1,

injury report of injured Amrendra Yadav as Exhibit-2, injury report of injured Birendra Yadav as Exhibit-2/1. Defence had also examined two DWs,

who are DW-1 Dhirendra Kumar Yadav, son of the informant and DW-2 Ashok Yadav.

After hearing rival submission as well as from perusal of the judgment impugned coupled with the materials available on the record, it is evident that

inter se relationship amongst the parties are duly admitted. Dispute relating to partition of the land is also found admitted. At an initial stage while the

dispute was continuing, parties have contested. Subsequently, as it is evident that the case has been compromised and on that very score, witnesses

were recalled, but they were not cross-examined in a way as was expected to demolish or to attract the case within ambit of Section 320 of the

Cr.P.C. The aforesaid event is visualizing from the judgment impugned. In the aforesaid background, the aforesaid deficiency still persists, whereupon

the judgment impugned could not be interfered with.

That being so, maintaining the conviction recorded by the learned lower Court, considering the evidence available on the record and further,

honouring the wish of the parties, who are none else rather own family members coupled with motive, land dispute relating to partition and further, the

occurrence took place in spur of moment, the sentence is modified and reduced as the period already undergone and in terms thereof, instant appeal is

disposed of.

Appellant is on bail, hence is discharged from its liability.