PATNA, India, Oct. 15 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on Sept. 16:

The present criminal appeal has been preferred under Section 413 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 against the judgment of acquittal dated 03.01.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge- III, Bhojpur at Ara in Sessions Trial No. 250 of 2024, arising out of Ara Town P.S. Case No. 702 of 2023, whereby Respondent No. 2 has been acquitted by the learned Trial Court from the charge of Sections 307 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

2. The prosecution case, according to the fardbeyan of the informant, in brief, is that on 28.08.2023, the informant admitted his daughter Anjani Kumari in Vindhyawasini Hospital for the purpose of delivery, where she gave birth and the doctor suggested to keep his daughter for about ten days. On 31.08.2023 at about 19:00 O'clock, when informant was talking to his son-in-law Rangnath Chauhan, at the hospital, suddenly accused Gautam Kumar came and fired three shots from his pistol upon the informant's son-in-law, causing him injury and heavy bleeding. The informant tried to catch the accused person, but he fled away towards station. Thereafter, the informant admitted his son-in-law in Shanti Memorial Hospital, Babu Bazar.

3. On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant, Ara Town P.S. Case No. 702 of 2023 was instituted under Sections 307 and 326 of the I.P.C. and 27 of the Arms Act and investigation was taken up by the police. The police after investigation submitted charge-sheet against Respondent No. 2 and, accordingly, cognizance was taken. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Charges were framed against the accused person under Sections 307 and 326 of the I.P.C. and 27 of the Arms Act to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. During the trial, the prosecution examined altogether 08 witnesses i.e. PW1 Shankar Chauhan (informant), PW2 Santra Devi, PW3 Dr. Vikash Singh, PW4 Shashikant Chauhan, PW5 Sarvesh Kumar (I.O.), PW6 Kanchan Kumari, PW7 Anjali Kumari and PW8 Rangnath Chauhan. The prosecution also produced certain documents which were marked as 'Exhibits', i.e. Signature of informant on fardbeyan; Signature of SHO Sanjeev Kumar on endorsement of FIR; Injury Report of victim Rangnathy Chauhan; Seizure-list; signature of Kanchan Kumari on seizure-list; L.T.I. of Shashi Kant Chauhan on seizure-list; Signature of S.H.O. Sanjeev Kumar on formal FIR; and Charge sheet No. 881 of 2023 dated 17.11.2023. The defence did not examine any witness. After closure of prosecution evidence, the statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and after conclusion of trial, learned trial court has acquitted the accused/respondent No. 2.

5. The learned trial court found material contradiction in the evidence of the informant in the trial and the records of the FIR. The learned trial court held that the information regarding the alleged occurrence was received by the police 15 minutes prior to the happening of the alleged occurrence, if evidence of PW 1 is considered, and the prosecution has not explained this contradiction. The relevant part of paragraph 20 of the impugned judgment is reproduced as under:

The rest of the document can be viewed at https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/NSMzMjEjMjAyNSMxI04=-ZoZQPDTWj7M=

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.