Manoj Singh vs State of Bihar on 5 August, 2010

Manoj Singh vs State of Bihar on 5 August, 2010

Facts:

The appellant has been indicted under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code,1872 as well as 17 of the Criminal Law  Amendment Act and 27 of the Arms Act and have been condemned to death for their conviction under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code,1872. Appellant, Manoj Singh has additionally been sentenced under Section 148 of the IPC, 1872. However, in Session’s Trial No. 174, there was no sentence for an offense under Sections 148 of the Indian Penal Code, 27 of the Arms Act, or 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. As a result, the learned Judge has submitted the case to this Court for confirmation of the Court’s death sentence. Same has been recorded as the Death Reference Number. 3 of 2008. Every one of the convicts have favored separate Allure against the judgment of conviction and sentence enlisted as Cr. No. of Appeal (D.B.) 72, 77 and 79 of 2008 separately and, thus, Passing Reference and three appeals have been heard together and arranged off by this normal judgment. In addition, it was stated in the First information report that the People’s War Group members of the unlawful assembly were identified with the assistance of other co-villagers, and it was discovered that the unlawful assembly included Amod Singh, Sahdeo Singh, Jogendra Singh, and Manoj Singh (appellant in Cr). No. of Appeal (D.B.) 77 of 2008) and other which incorporate the names of 36 people, including the appellants. The claim that they were a criminal group that entered the village with deadly weapons, murdered the innocent residents, and then fled.

Issue:

In this case, it was alleged that the respondent with the help of villagers formed an unlawful assembly with deadly weapons and entered into the village and murdered the villagers.

Appellant’s Contention:

 The learned counsel for the appellant, fought that observers, P.Ws. 1 to 7 and 12 and 13 have been announced threatening and have not upheld the indictment form and witnesses claimed to have witnessed the event, their evidence is contradictory, developed and embellished due to the fact that they are hearsay witnesses. Further, the FIR however stopped on 18.05.2004, yet, the equivalent was gotten by Judge on 21.05.2004, in this way, there is postponement in sending the FIR to the Justice and there is not a great reason and, thus, the FIR experience the ill effects of preceded and is not dependable and unfriendly derivation expected to be drawn in regards to the validity of the case. The learned counsel for the appellant, argued, however, that taking into account the evidence of three witnesses who have supported the prosecution case are not eyewitnesses to the occurrence, their evidence suffers from contradiction and development regarding their statement before the police, and their evidence is not reliable or worthy of confidence to secure a conviction due to a variety of infirmities. The learned counsel fought the idea of the proof with respect to the ID of the blamed is not by any stretch solid to warrant conviction as witnesses, however professed to be eyewitnesses are, as a matter of fact, not observer and the indictment has not had the option to demonstrate the charges past sensible questions. . As a result, the learned lower court’s order of conviction and sentence cannot be sustained.

Respondent’s Contention:

In support of the prosecution, the State’s knowledgeable counsel argued that the charges have been proved. As alleged in Fardhbeyan, prosecutors believe 60 to 70 people armed with firearms entered the village, while an informant was sitting at the Bamboo Club (Banswari). 8 and Uday Paswan (dead), after 60-70 people gathered, Brinda, Gajendra and Sudhir opened fire indiscriminately, killing Uday Paswan and the informant. The prosecution has also stated that the female members of his family prevented him from leaving the house, and when the position was restored, he went outside to find the bodies of Naga Paswan, Udai Paswan, Sharawan Paswan, and Vijay Paswan; he does not know who killed them. The prosecution has also declared this witness hostile, and his earlier statement to the police has drawn attention. He has likewise expressed that at the hour of event he was at Janipur, alongside his dad, and after data he came to town then saw the dead groups of Vijay Paswan and Udai Paswan and he didn’t have any idea who killed them and, subsequently, this witness additionally not upheld the arraignment case with respect to the ramifications of the charged. Prosecution Witness 4  has stated that his father, Vijay Paswan, was killed on May 18, 2004, but he does not know who committed the crime. At the time, he was a student at the Public School in Ballami, Phulwari, Patna. When he learned of his father’s death, he traveled to Patna to attend his funeral, but he does not know who committed the crime.

Judgements:

 Thinking about the whole proof since the indictment has appropriately settled that 60-70 people came making terminating causing demise of four people and the passing of four people having been laid out by the examination report and the posthumous report, the spot of event has been laid out by the observers and the researching official and the event at about the time and days laid out by the proof of P.Ws. 8, 10, and 11, who have been identified as having participated in the incident and named the appellants. The proof of three observers who have upheld the arraignment case is in regards to the support of the appellants in the unlawful gathering turning to terminating, causing passing of four people and, consequently, the cooperation of the appellants has been laid out by apt, dependable and blameless proof. The Court concluded and affirmed that the charges against the appellants under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code have been successfully established by the prosecution. However, as far as the appellants’ sentence is concerned, there is only evidence that the appellants were members of an unlawful assembly that used force, guided by a mob mentality, and that this is not one of the rarest cases for extreme punishment. As a result, the appellants’ death sentence will be changed to life imprisonment, and the Criminal Appeals will be dismissed as a result of this sentence change. The response to the Death Reference is negative. The aforementioned adjustments result in the dismissal of the Criminal Appeals.

Reference:

https://indiankanoon.org

This Article is written by Rama Singh, student of Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur and an intern at Legal Vidhiya.

Admin