{"id":129423,"date":"2005-01-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-01-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005"},"modified":"2016-04-24T06:03:00","modified_gmt":"2016-04-24T00:33:00","slug":"nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005","title":{"rendered":"Nagarjit Ahir vs State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Nagarjit Ahir vs State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2005<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: B.P.Singh<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: B.P. Singh, Arun Kumar<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (crl.)  1020-1021 of 1999\n\nPETITIONER:\nNAGARJIT AHIR                               \n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF BIHAR                              \n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 12\/01\/2005\n\nBENCH:\nB.P. SINGH &amp; ARUN KUMAR     \n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<br \/>\nWITH CRL.A.Nos.529, 530 and 531 of 2000<\/p>\n<p>B.P.Singh,J.\n<\/p>\n<p> \tThis batch of appeals by special leave arises out of a common  judgment and order<br \/>\nof the High Court of judicature at Patna dated 25th February, 1999 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 513<br \/>\n&amp; 515 of 1986.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThere were 10 appellants before the High Court and those ten appellants have<br \/>\npreferred these 4 appeals before us.  Out of them, three have since died namely, Tribeni Ahir,<br \/>\nRamshish Ahir and Surajdev Dubey.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe appellants were tried by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Arrah in<br \/>\nSessions Trial No.69\/77.  By judgment and order dated 30th September, 1986 the trial court<br \/>\nfound them guilty and convicted them of the offences with which they were charged and<br \/>\nsentenced them to various terms of imprisonment.  What is  of significance is the fact that<br \/>\nappellants   Tribeni Ahir (since deceased), Dhorha Ahir, Nand Kumar Ahir and Jugeshwar<br \/>\nDubey have been sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC.  The remaining<br \/>\nappellants have been sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302 read with Section 149<br \/>\nIPC.  Their convictions have been challenged before us in these appeals.<br \/>\n\tIn the occurrence that took place at about 8.00 A.M. on 13.4.1976 Jagarnath Singh<br \/>\nalias Natha Singh lost his life.  In the same incident injuries were inflicted on 4 others, namely,<br \/>\nPW-1 Kamta Singh (brother of the deceased), PWS 2 &amp; 4 Murari Singh and Rangnath Singh,<br \/>\nsons of the deceased and Ramta Singh PW-7, a cousin of the deceased.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe case of the prosecution is that at about 8.00 A.M.on the date of occurrence, the<br \/>\ndeceased as well as the injured witnesses and others had gone to take   bath in river Ganges at<br \/>\nthe Taksemar Ghat.  That was a day  on which the Satuwan festival was being celebrated.  Large<br \/>\nnumber of persons had come to the Ghat for a holy dip in river Ganges.  When the deceased and<br \/>\nother members of his family including the injured witnesses, were coming out after taken bath,<br \/>\nthe appellants are alleged to have come and started assault.  The case of the prosecution is that<br \/>\nall those 12 persons were armed with barchhas.  Surajdeo Dubey (since deceased) exhorted them<br \/>\nto assault whereafter Tribeni Ahir, Dhorha Ahir, Nand Kumar Ahir and Yogeshwar Ahir<br \/>\ninflicted barchha injuries on the deceased Jagarnath Singh who after receiving injuries on his<br \/>\nchest and on his fore-head fell down and died.  PW-1 Kamta Singh was assaulted by Sheoji Ahir,<br \/>\nMoti Ahir and Teja Ahir while Ramta Singh PW-7 (the informant) was assaulted by Nand<br \/>\nKumar Ahir.  Similarly, Rangnath Singh PW-4 was assaulted by Lakshman Ahir.  On alarm<br \/>\nbeing raised, Karu Kurmi PW-3 Sheo Bilash Singh PW-5 and some others arrived at the spot<br \/>\nand witness the occurrence.  The assailants fled away.  The injured including the deceased were<br \/>\nfirst brought to Salempur Chatti and thereafter to the sadar hospital at Arrah.  The deceased<br \/>\nwas declared dead while the other injured witnesses were treated at the same hospital.  The first<br \/>\ninformation report lodged by Ramta Singh PW-7 was recorded by Sub-Inspector R.B. Singh<br \/>\n(since dead) at the Arrah Mufassil police station at 11.00 A.M. on the same day.  The case was<br \/>\ninvestigated and ultimately the appellants were put up for trial.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe appellants took up various defences.  Some of them stated that they have been<br \/>\nfalsely implicated due to enmity while others contended that this case was a counter blast to<br \/>\nArrah Munfassil P.S.case No.11 registered on the same day which arose out of  an incident which<br \/>\ntook place earlier in the morning at 6.00 A.M.  It was  alleged that Tribeni and Ramshish Ahir<br \/>\nappellants were guarding their harvested bundles of gram and wheat which had been kept in<br \/>\ntheir khalihan.   The prosecution party attempted to loot away the bundles and in that process<br \/>\narmed with deadly weapons they attacked the aforesaid appellants by barchha and lathi.  On the<br \/>\nintervention of others, they were saved.  Thereafter, Tribeni Ahir lodged a first information<br \/>\nreport at 3.00 P.M.on the same day.  That case was also investigated and the accused in that case<br \/>\nwhich included some of the members of the prosecution party in this case were put up for trial in<br \/>\nSessions Case No.449\/77.  It is not disputed that that case ultimately resulted in an acquittal.<br \/>\n\tSo far as the instant case is concerned, 7 eye-witnesses were examined by the<br \/>\nprosecution and they are PWS 1,2,3,4,5,6 &amp; 7.  Of them PWS 1,2,4 &amp; 7 are injured witnesses.<br \/>\nThe trial court as well as the High Court have concurrently found the appellants guilty.  The<br \/>\ncourts below have found that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, some of them injured<br \/>\nwitnesses, is worthy of credence and can be relied upon for convicting the appellants.  The<br \/>\nmedical evidence on record corroborates the case of the prosecution.  In view of the concurrent<br \/>\nfindings of fact recorded by the courts below, which we find to be based on evidence on record, it<br \/>\nis not necessary for us to consider the facts of the case in detail.  We shall, however, notice the<br \/>\nsubmissions urged before us.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt was firstly submitted that this case was in the nature of a counter blast to the case<br \/>\nlodged by the members of the defence party.  It was submitted  before us that at 6.00 A.M.on the<br \/>\nsame day the members of the prosecution party had attempted to loot away harvested crop of<br \/>\nTribeni Ahir and Ramashis Ahir, who were also assaulted in the course of that incident.  To save<br \/>\nthemselves, and as a counter blast, the instant  case was registered.  We may at this stage observe<br \/>\nthat though the occurrence as alleged by the defence took place at 6.00 A.M.on the date of<br \/>\noccurrence, the first information report was lodged at 3.00 P.M.   On the other hand, occurrence<br \/>\ngiving rise to these appeals is said to have taken place at about 8.00 A.M.and the first<br \/>\ninformation report was lodged at 11.00 A.M.   Obviously, therefore, in point of time the report<br \/>\nlodged by the prosecution in this case was earlier that the report lodged by Tribeni Ahir.   It<br \/>\nmay, therefore, not be correct to suggest that this case was filed as a counter blast.  In any event,<br \/>\nas noticed earlier, the Sessions Case arising from the first information report lodged by the<br \/>\nappellants resulted in acquittal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt was then contended that the prosecution has not been able to explain the injuries<br \/>\nsuffered by Tribeni Ahir and Ramashis Ahir and, therefore, the prosecution case must fail.  The<br \/>\nsubmission is mis-conceived.  As held by the High Court,  Tribeni Ahir and Ramashis Ahir were<br \/>\ninjured in a different occurrence which took place earlier in the morning even as alleged by the<br \/>\nappellants.  The occurrence giving rise to the instant appeals took place later at 8.00 A.M.  There<br \/>\nwere, therefore, two occurrences which took place on the same day.  In the earlier occurrence<br \/>\nTribeni Ahir and Ramashis Ahir appellants were injured.  In the subsequent occurrence,<br \/>\nJagarnath Singh lost his life and 4 others were injured.  There were, therefore, two different<br \/>\noccurrences and it, therefore, cannot be suggested that  Tribeni Ahir and Ramashis Ahir were<br \/>\ninjured in the course of the same incident and that the prosecution has failed to explain their<br \/>\ninjuries.  The submission proceeds with fallacious assumption that the two of the appellants were<br \/>\ninjured in the course of the the same incident.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt is worth noticing that in the report lodged by Tribeni Ahir, there is no mention of<br \/>\nthe fact that the assailants were also injured, and one of them died of the injuries sustained by<br \/>\nhim.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt was then urged that the place of occurrence has been shifted by the prosecution.<br \/>\nWe have perused the evidence on record and we find that there is no substance in this<br \/>\nsubmission.  The consistent case of the prosecution is that after they took a dip in the river<br \/>\nGanges and came out and had thereafter, walked about 20 to 25 steps, they were assaulted by the<br \/>\nappellants.  We have carefully read the evidence brought to our notice and we find nothing in the<br \/>\nevidence to suggest that the place of occurrence was a khalihan belonging to  Tribeni Ahir and<br \/>\nRamashis Ahir.  There is no doubt reference to some bundles of gram  kept in the fields near the<br \/>\nplace where the occurrence took place.  That itself would not lead us to jump to the conclusion<br \/>\nthat the occurrence took place in a khalihan.  It appears form the evidence on record that the<br \/>\nharvesting season was over and in many cases the harvested crop had been kept in the field while<br \/>\nmany cultivators had taken them to their khalihans.  The mere fact that some bundles of<br \/>\nharvested crops were lying near by does not necessary lead to the inference that the occurrence<br \/>\ntook place in a khalihan.  The evidence on this aspect of the matter is consistent and we find no<br \/>\nreason to hold that the place of occurrence has been shifted.  In this connection, we may also<br \/>\nnotice the submission urged on behalf of the appellants that the investigating officer was not<br \/>\navailable to give evidence in this case since he had died.  We, however, do not find that the<br \/>\nappellants were in any manner prejudiced by his non-examination.  The evidence is consistent<br \/>\nand the place of occurrence stands established by the clear evidence of the eye-witnesses which<br \/>\nhas not been impeached in their cross-examination.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt was then submitted that in spite of the fact that large number of persons had<br \/>\nassembled at the bank of the river at the time of occurrence, the witnesses examined are only<br \/>\nthose who are members of the family of the deceased, or in some manner  connected with him.<br \/>\nWe cannot lose sight of the fact that four of such witnesses are injured witnesses and, therefore,<br \/>\nin the absence of strong reasons, we cannot discard their testimony.  The fact that they are<br \/>\nrelated to the deceased is the reason why they were attacked by the appellants.  Moreover, in<br \/>\nsuch situations though many people may have seen the occurrence, it may not be possible for the<br \/>\nprosecution to examine each one of them.   In fact, there is evidence on record to suggest that<br \/>\nwhen the occurrence took place, people started running helter-skelter.  In such a situation it<br \/>\nwould be indeed difficult to find out the other persons who had witnessed the occurrence.  In any<br \/>\nevent, we have the evidence of as many as 7 witnesses, 4 of them injured, whose evidence has<br \/>\nbeen found to be reliable by the courts below, and we find no reason to take a different view.<br \/>\n\tA submission was urged before us with regard to the motive for the commission of<br \/>\noffence.  In view of the direct evidence available on record, it is not necessary to go into that<br \/>\nquestion, but it does appear from the evidence on record that the relationship between the<br \/>\nparties was strained.   This is obvious from the informatory petition filed by  some of the<br \/>\nappellants on 19th March, 1976 against some of the members of the prosecution party.  The<br \/>\nprosecution party also alleges that they got a case initiated against members of the defence party<br \/>\nunder Section 107 Cr.P.C.and a day before the occurrence they were being pressurised to<br \/>\nwithdraw that case.  However, as we have observed  earlier, in a case of this nature where the<br \/>\nprosecution case is supported by as many as 7 eye-witnesses, it is not necessary to search for the<br \/>\nexact motive which motivated the appellants to commit the offence.<br \/>\n\tWe, therefore, find no reason to differ from the view taken by the courts below.<br \/>\nHowever, there is one aspect of the matter which requires consideration.  Appellant Nagarjit<br \/>\nAhir is the son of Lakshman Ahir.  The prosecution has not alleged any overt act against<br \/>\nNagarjit Ahir.  The evidence on record establishes the fact that large number of persons were<br \/>\npresent.  In such a case, it may be safe to convict only those persons against whom overt act is<br \/>\nalleged with the aid of Section 149 IPC, lest some innocent spectators may get involved.  This is<br \/>\nonly a rule of caution and not a rule of law.  In the instant case, we find that even if Nagarjit Ahir<br \/>\nwas present when the occurrence took place, there is nothing to suggest that he shared the<br \/>\ncommon object of the unlawful assembly.  Admittedly, he did not take any part in the assault.<br \/>\nWe do not, therefore, consider it safe to convict him merely on the ground that he was present,<br \/>\nbecause admittedly large number of persons had come to the ghat that day for taking a bath in<br \/>\nriver Ganges.  We, therefore, extend to him the benefit of doubt and acquit him of all the charges<br \/>\nlevelled  against him.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn the result, Criminal Appeal No.1020\/99 preferred by Nagarjit Ahir is allowed and<br \/>\nhe is acquitted of all the charges levelled against him.  This appellant is on bail. His bail bonds<br \/>\nare discharged.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe other appeals i.e. Criminal Appeal Nos.1021\/1999, 529, 530 &amp; 531 of 2000 are<br \/>\ndismissed.  The appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds are cancelled.   The appellants must<br \/>\nsurrender forthwith to serve out the remainder of the sentence, failing which the State  must take<br \/>\nsteps to apprehend them and send them to custody.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Nagarjit Ahir vs State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2005 Author: B.P.Singh Bench: B.P. Singh, Arun Kumar CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 1020-1021 of 1999 PETITIONER: NAGARJIT AHIR RESPONDENT: STATE OF BIHAR DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12\/01\/2005 BENCH: B.P. SINGH &amp; ARUN KUMAR JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T WITH [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-129423","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Nagarjit Ahir vs State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Nagarjit Ahir vs State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2005-01-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-04-24T00:33:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Nagarjit Ahir vs State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-01-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-24T00:33:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005\"},\"wordCount\":2225,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005\",\"name\":\"Nagarjit Ahir vs State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-01-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-24T00:33:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nagarjit Ahir vs State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2005\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Nagarjit Ahir vs State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Nagarjit Ahir vs State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-01-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-04-24T00:33:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Nagarjit Ahir vs State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2005","datePublished":"2005-01-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-24T00:33:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005"},"wordCount":2225,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005","name":"Nagarjit Ahir vs State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-01-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-24T00:33:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagarjit-ahir-vs-state-of-bihar-on-12-january-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nagarjit Ahir vs State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2005"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/129423","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=129423"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/129423\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=129423"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=129423"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=129423"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}