Criminal Appeal No.171 of 2015
Patna High Court
Bench: Hon’ble The Chief Justice J., Hon’ble Anil Kumar Upadhayay J.
Date of judgment: 25th January 2018
Relevant Acts/Sections:
- Section 302 of IPC (Punishment for murder)
- Section 201 of IPC (Punishment of offenses committed within India)
- Section 34 of IPC (Acts done by several persons in furtherance)
- Section 364 of IPC (Kidnapping or abducting in order to murder)
- Section 203 of IPC (Giving false information respecting an offense committed)
Backstory
In this case, the informant Sunil Kumar dated 21.12.2003 addressed to Station House Officer, Piro, Bhojpur is that his uncle Sri Awadh Bihari Singh was Mukhia of Bajari Panchayat and was Chairman of Rajad of PiroPrakhand who is said to have disappeared since 10.12.2003. According to informant he along with his relations search uncle of the informant to the houses of relations and all political leaders who were said to be in contact but to date, he could not be traced out. It is alleged that his uncle used to give loans on the interest of a heavy amount in Piro Bazar and other places and he was also active in political activity. He is said to have stain relation with Rajeshwar Dubey of Chilbilia village during the election and after the election, it has also been alleged that after inquiry it had transpired about munsi of his uncle namely Rajendra Prasad Gupta was engaged in the collection of interest. It has further been alleged that presently heavy amount was given to appellant Om Prakash Gupta in Bazar.
FIR was drawn on 21.12.2003. In Ara Town P.S. a beheaded dead body was found on 11.12.2003 and in Piro (Town) P.S. the police allegedly on the confessional statement of the appellant recovered only part of the skull and Hexa bled and mussal with blood-stained and ash of burning clothes of the deceased from the house of Narayan Sah. The skull bone recovered purportedly on the confessional statement of the appellant by no stretch of the imagination could be connected with the dead body recovered on 11.12.2003
The appellant denied the charges and pleaded innocence and as such he was subjected to the session’s trial. On behalf of the prosecution altogether 12 witnesses have been examined. Mr. Sharma done the examination of the headless body.
Postmortem Findings
In that case, the doctor on examination of the headless body was of the opinion that dead body was of a male aged about 25- 35 whereas the opinion of the doctor P.W.8 that part of the skull was of a male aged about 35-45.
Mr. Sharma submitted that part of the skull was recovered from the place adjacent to the crematorium. There was no distinctive mark to identify the skull and correlate the skull with the dead body found on 11.12.2003. He submitted that the doctor who has examined the skull on 29th December 2003 has found skull bone with soft tissues and as such the part of the skull could not correlate with a dead body found on 11.12.2003.
Judgment
The judgment of conviction passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bhojpur at Ara in Sessions Trial was set aside.
The appellant was in jail, he was directed to be released forthwith if he was not otherwise required in connection with any other case.