Khelawan Yadav vs The State Of Bihar

Criminal Appeal (DB) No.105 of 1990

Patna High Court

Bench: Hon’ble Shyam Kishore Sharma J., Hon’ble Aditya Kumar Trivedi J.

Date of judgment: 13th March 2013

Relevant Acts/Sections:

  • Section 27 of IPC (Property in possession of wife, clerk or servant.)
  • Section 302 of IPC (Punishment for murder)
  • Section 307 of IPC (attempt to murder)
  • Section 313 of CrPC( Power to examine the accused)

Backstory

In this case, Anandi Prasad had given him far began at Bind Police Station along with his father Lala Mahto and brother Bindeshwar Prasad in injured condition alleging inter alia that on the same day at about 06:00 AM while he had gone to his field lying at MilkiKhandha to sow paddy seed along with his father and brothers. During the midst of ploughing the field, Khelawan Yadav armed with a rifle, Dulli Mahto armed with Lathi, Rajendra Mahto armed with a gun, Arun Yadav armed with a gun, Umesh Prasad armed with Garasa, Subhash Prasad armed with Bhala, Baleshwar Mahto, SiwanMahto armed with a gun, Ram Bilas Yadav armed with Garasa, Surendra Yadav and Ram Lagan Prasad armed with a gun, armed with a gun also came. KhelawanMahto said that why his field is being ploughed which was retaliated by him claiming that the land belongs to him.

On this Dulli, Mahto ordered to kill. Khelawanyadav shot at his father from his rifle causing injury overhead of his father. Thereafter, all the accused persons began to fire indiscriminately to terrorize the persons. He named Brahamdeo Sao, Kameshwar Prasad, Ramu Sao as a witness who saw the occurrence.

FIR was registered and investigation accordingly commenced. The accused persons were put on trial.

The prosecution had succeeded in getting the case proved beyond all reasonable doubt.

Postmortem Findings

Lala Mahto (since deceased) was initially examined by Dr. C.P. Sinha (PW-2) who had found the following injuries on this person.

One incised wound 4 ½” x 1″ x skull bone deep on the right side of head injuring the right parietal lobe of the brain (laceration of the cortex cell) leading to unconsciousness and paralysis of the left side of the body) In the opinion of the doctor, the injury was caused on account of sharp cutting weapon and was grievous. The age of injury was determined within four hours.

On account of the critical condition of Lala Mahto, he was brought to PMCH on 23.06.1982 itself and was attempted and treated there, and during course thereof, he succumbs to his injury. During the said course, he was examined by C.W.2 who found following an injury on his person:

1) Lacerated wound on the scalp.

2) Fracture of the skull bone.

3) Brain matter was protruding.

4) Patient unconscious

5) Pupil dilated on the right side.

6) Fracture of the skull bone was seen in X-ray plate no.4535.

7) No foreign body was found.

The age of the injury could not be determined. He further accepted that in case Bullet is found passes grazing the skull, the injury no.1 and 2 could be produced.

During postmortem, the doctor had found following ante mortem injury.

(1) Incised wound 4 ½” x 1″ x brain deep on the vault of the head (slightly on the right side).

(2) On dissection, the skull was cut and fractured corresponding to the level of injury no.1. The brain was lacerated by pieces of bone. There was subdural hematoma found over the surface of the brain.

The time elapsed since death was within 36 hours.

The doctor had opined that the injury was caused by sharp cutting heavy weapon cause of death was shown as on account of head injury.

PW-2 had also examined injured Bindeshwari Prasad as well as Anandi Prasad and found the following:

(A) Bindeshwari Prasad:

1) One lacerated wound 1″ x ¼” x ¼” on the head arterially.

2) Three lacerated wounds of various sizes ranging from 2 ½”

x ¼” x ¼” to 1″ x ¼” x ¼” on the back.

(B) Anandi Prasad:

1) Multiple pea-sized gunshots wounds (Pilate) on the left scapular region of the back. All were superficial.

2) One pea-size wound was on the left side of the head posteriorly and it was superficial.

So in the opinion of doctor the injury sustained by Bindeshwari Prasad was caused by hard and blunt substance and were simple while the injuries found over the persons of Anandi, the informant it was a gunshot injury.

They were also examined at PMCH by CW-2 who had found the following injury:

Anandi Prasad:

  1. Lacerated wound on scalp 2″ long.2. Pellet like injury mask on the left shoulder.

On the same date and time he had examined Bindeshwari Prasad found following injury:

  1. A stitched wound on the scalp.
  2. The patient was unconscious.
  3. On X-ray showed nothing abnormal.

Umesh had sustained the injury as:

1) Fracture of Lt. waist causing incised wound 2½”

x 1½” laterally cutting the whole soft tissue at soft of radius Bone.

2) Incised wound 1½” x ¼” x ½” on the right forearm 1″ below the elbow.

3) Incised penetrating would ½” x ½”x1″ on the Lt.side of the chest over the heart area.

4) Incised would 1 ½” x ¼” on the head interior at its middle.

5) Incised wound 1½” x ¼”x ¼” on the Lt. thigh.

6) Incised would 1½” x 1/6″ on the neck.

Injury No. 1 was grievous and 2 to 6 simple caused by a sharp cutting weapon

Judgment

All the appellants were on bail, hence their bail bond was canceled and directed to surrender before the learned lower court to serve out sentences and the rest punishment provided from the trial court.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *