IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CR. APP (DB) No.1028 of 2010
DADAN PANDEY
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR
with
CR. APP (DB) No.1068 of 2010
ARBIND PANDEY & ANR
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR
with
CR. APP (DB) No.1092 of 2010
ANIL KUMAR SINGH
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR
with
CR. APP (DB) No.1120 of 2010
SRIKANT PANDEY
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR
with
CR. APP (DB) No.1058 of 2010
JANESHWAR PANDEY
Versus
STATE OF BIHAR
-----------
04. 26.10.2010 Appellants in all these appeals have been
convicted for the offence, punishable under section
302/148, 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of
the Arms Act.
Altogether 10 persons were killed in the
occurrence.
The case was instituted on the basis of
Fardbeyan of P.W. 3, Uma Shankar Singh.
The appellant, Dadan Pandey and Srikant
Pandey in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1028 of 2010 and
1120 of 2010, respectively, are said to have killed
Ayodhya Chaurasia.
2
The appellant, Janeshwar Pandey in Criminal
Appeal No. 1058 of 2010 and Anil Kumar Singh in
Criminal Appeal No. 1092 of 2010 are said to have
killed Basisth Sah.
Arbind Pandey and Birendra Pandey @
Virendra Pandey are the appellants in Criminal Appeal
No. 1068 of 2010. Arbind Pandey is said to have killed
Sunil Kumar Singh and Birendra Pandey @ Virendra
Pandey is said to have killed Ramashish Paswan.
All these appellants have been identified by
P.W. 3, the informant. Besides that, they have been
identified by some other witnesses also. Out of those
witnesses, the evidence of P.W. 1, P.W. 6 and P.W. 12
have not been relied upon by the Trial Court. So far
P.W. 4 is concerned, since he did not turn up for
cross-examination, his evidence has also not been
considered by the Trial Court for conviction of the
appellants. Then remains only one witness, i.e., P.W.
13. P.W. 13 has also identified some of the appellants,
such as Arbind Pandey and Birendra Pandey @
Virendra Pandey.
Shri Kanhaiya Prasad Singh, Sr. Counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellants, Arbind Pandey
and Birendra Pandey @ Virendra Pandey, in Criminal
3
Appeal No. 1068 of 2010, submitted that the medical
evidence do not corroborate the allegation against
these appellants and so far P.W. 13 is concerned, his
evidence would also not be considered for the reason
that he was examined for the first time after 5-6 days
of the occurrence and at the initial stage he has not
disclosed the name of any of the accused.
In all these appeals, this is the submission of
the counsel appearing for the appellants, who have
been represented by Shri Rana Pratap Singh, Shri
Yogesh Chandra Verma, Shri Rama Kant Sharma and
Shri Ajay Kumar Thakur, Sr. Counsels, that this is a
case in which conviction of the appellant is only on
account of single identification. Other submissions
have also been made in support of the appellants’
claim for granting bail.
However, considering the fact that the
incident is not a case of normal occurrence of murder,
rather it is a case of massacre. Several persons have
been killed and so far the killing of 10 persons is
concerned, that is not questionable and identification,
as even by at least one witness, i.e., P.W. 3, Uma
Shankar Singh, is consistent.
Considering this fact, we do not feel inclined
4
to grant bail to any of the appellants for the present.
In case the appeal is not heard and decided within a
year, the appellant will have liberty to move and
renew their prayer for bail.
(Mridula Mishra, J.)
(Dharnidhar Jha, J.)
SKM