{"id":155580,"date":"2010-02-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2"},"modified":"2018-08-17T16:45:57","modified_gmt":"2018-08-17T11:15:57","slug":"kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2","title":{"rendered":"Kapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah vs State Of Bihar on 1 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Patna High Court<\/div>\n
Kapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah vs State Of Bihar on 1 February, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Dharnidhar Jha<\/div>\n
                         CRIMINAL APPEAL No.64 OF 2003 DB\n                                      With\n                         CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 265 OF 2003 DB\n                                      -------\n<\/pre>\n
        Against the judgment and order dated 21st January, 2003 passed by Shri
\n        Baleshwar Prasad Singh, Presiding officer, Addl. Court No. 1, (Fast Track
\n        Court), Sasaram\n<\/p>\n
                                       ———\n<\/p>\n
        Kapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah, son of Sakhi Sah, resident of village –
\n        Mednipur, P.S. – Sasaram (M), District – Rohtas
\n                                ……Appellant (in Cr. Appeal No. 64\/2003)<\/p>\n
        Sudarshan Sah, son of Kapil Sah alias Kapildeo Sah, resident of village –
\n        Mednipur, P.S. – Sasaram (M), District – Rohtas at Sasaram
\n                                ……..Appellant (in Cr. Appeal No. 265\/2003)<\/p>\n
                                    Versus<\/p>\n
        The State of Bihar ……………. (Respondent in both the appeals.)<\/p>\n
                                             ——-\n<\/p>\n
        For the Appellants :       S\/s Vikram Deo Singh,\n                                        Pawan Kumar Singh, Advocates\n        For the Respondents:       Shri Abhimanyu Sharma, A.P.P.\n                                          ----------\n                                       PRESENT\n\n                      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE DHARNIDHAR JHA\n                                          &\n                      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR\n                                     ---------\n\n\nDharnidhar Jha\n\nRakesh Kumar, JJ.      The two appeals arise out of the judgment dated 21st January,\n\n<\/pre>\n
                 2003 rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge I -cum-<\/p>\n
                 Presiding Officer, FTC, Sasaram in Sessions Trial no. 92\/88 \/<\/p>\n
                 380\/2002 by which the two appellants, one in each of the two<\/p>\n
                 appeals, were found guilty of committing offence under section 302<\/p>\n
                 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and were directed to
\n                               2<\/span><\/p>\n
suffer rigorous imprisonment for life. Besides, appellant Sudarshan<\/p>\n
Sah who was found guilty of also committing offence under section<\/p>\n
27 of the Arms Act while the other appellant Kapil Sah alias<\/p>\n
Kapildeo Sah was acquitted of that charge, was directed to suffer<\/p>\n
rigorous imprisonment for three years on that account. The<\/p>\n
appellants have brought into question the findings recorded by the<\/p>\n
learned Trial Judge through these two appeals.\n<\/p>\n
2.    The prosecution case is contained in Ext. 1, the Fardbeyan of<\/p>\n
P.W. 5, Sardar Ram who happens to be the son of the deceased<\/p>\n
Sheo Pujan Ram. It is stated that while the informant and his family<\/p>\n
members were asleep in the night of 10.2.1987, he picked up the<\/p>\n
sound of some Kharkharahat on which, his father came out of the<\/p>\n
room in which he was sleeping, and found the two appellants along<\/p>\n
with four others to have jumped inside his Angan. Appellant Kapil<\/p>\n
Sah was armed with lathi whereas appellant Sudarshan Sah was<\/p>\n
having a pistol in his hand. The deceased cried to the informant to<\/p>\n
open the door of the room as appellants had come along with the<\/p>\n
criminals to kill him. The informant opened the doors and his father<\/p>\n
entered inside it in a hurry. It is alleged that accused persons,<\/p>\n
thereafter, hammered the doors with Silwat and Musal (both heavy<\/p>\n
stone and wood materials), as a result of which, the doors were<\/p>\n
broken and the room was opened. The two appellants along with<\/p>\n
four unknown are said to have entered inside it and they are further<\/p>\n
alleged to have hurled abuses on the informant, P.W. 5, his wife,<\/p>\n
P.W. 4 and the wife of his younger brother, P.W. 2 Ram Daiya
\n                                3<\/span><\/p>\n
Devi    and were made to stand in the corner of the room and<\/p>\n
thereafter appellant Sudarshan Ram shot fire into the head of his<\/p>\n
father, as a result of which he fell down dead.\n<\/p>\n
3.     It is alleged that the two appellants threatened the informant<\/p>\n
and his family members not to report the matter to the police else<\/p>\n
they would also be liquidated and after firing a shot again in the<\/p>\n
Angan all culprits went away. It was alleged that an earthen pot<\/p>\n
which was kept inside the room, was broken during the incident.<\/p>\n
4.     As regards the cause of occurrence, it was alleged that the<\/p>\n
son of appellant Kapil Sah had been murdered and the deceased<\/p>\n
Sheo Pujan Ram was one of the witnesses on behalf of the<\/p>\n
prosecution but was not ready to depose against the accused persons<\/p>\n
of that case. As such, the appellant Kapil Sah had taken a vow to<\/p>\n
kill the deceased and also of not shaving his beards till he fulfilled<\/p>\n
his vow.\n<\/p>\n
5.     On the basis of Fardbeyan, (Ext. 1), FIR, (Ext. 6) was drawn<\/p>\n
up and investigation was taken up. It appears that the dead body<\/p>\n
was sent up for postmortem examination to Dr. A.K. Upadhyaya<\/p>\n
who found a semi circular penetrating wound on the right side of<\/p>\n
the forehead with burning of the surrounding skin and the whole<\/p>\n
circumference of the cranial vault broken into pieces exposing the<\/p>\n
cranial cavity. The brain matter was also found in pieces and part of<\/p>\n
the m\u00e9ninges was missing. In the opinion of P.W. 6, Dr.<\/p>\n
Upadhyaya, the injury was ante mortem caused by some fire arm<\/p>\n
and was sufficient to cause death in the normal course of nature. It
\n                               4<\/span><\/p>\n
appears further that after finding sufficient material against the<\/p>\n
accused persons they were sent up for trial by the police, after<\/p>\n
which the impugned judgment was pronounced.\n<\/p>\n
6.    The defence of the appellants was that they had falsely been<\/p>\n
implicated on account of suspicion. It was further suggested to the<\/p>\n
witnesses that the deceased was a man of criminal antecedent, even<\/p>\n
being prosecuted for a charge under section 302 of the IPC and had<\/p>\n
earned many enemies and any of whom could have done the act. It<\/p>\n
was suggested to the witnesses that they had falsely implicated the<\/p>\n
appellants. The appellants further challenged their identification by<\/p>\n
the witnesses and suggested that the two were not there and the<\/p>\n
evidence on identification of the appellants was false and incorrect.<\/p>\n
7.    In support of the charge, the prosecution examined seven<\/p>\n
witnesses and one court witness, out of whom, P.W. 7, Manik<\/p>\n
Chand Ram was a witness of formal character who had witnessed<\/p>\n
the holding of the inquest on the dead body and preparation of the<\/p>\n
report Ext. 4 as also seizure of two empty cartridges, one from the<\/p>\n
place of occurrence room and the other from Angan of the deceased<\/p>\n
and the preparation of seizure memo, Ext. 5. Same is the case of<\/p>\n
the solitary court witness, Badri Narayan Singh, who proved the<\/p>\n
writings of the FIR, Ext. 6. Out of the remaining witnesses, P.W. 6,<\/p>\n
as we have just indicated, is the doctor who held the post mortem<\/p>\n
examination and prepared the report Ext. 2. P.W. 1 Sheo Prasad<\/p>\n
Ram is a witness who had not witnessed the incident of breaking<\/p>\n
open the door, entering the room by the accused persons and killing
\n                                5<\/span><\/p>\n
the decease but has deposed that on hearing the cries of the family<\/p>\n
members he came there and found that they were all weeping and<\/p>\n
telling that it were the two appellants who had killed the deceased.<\/p>\n
As regards P.W. 2, Ramdaiya Devi, she is the wife of the younger<\/p>\n
brother of P.W. 5 and has presented herself as eye witness to the<\/p>\n
occurrence like P.W. 3, Tetri Devi who is the wife of the deceased<\/p>\n
and mother of P.W. 5. Both Sardar Ram (P.W.5), the informant of<\/p>\n
the case, and his wife P.W. 4, Manbanti Devi have also given eye<\/p>\n
witness account of the occurrence.\n<\/p>\n
8.    We have heard Shri Vikram Deo Singh, learned counsel for<\/p>\n
the appellants who has, firstly, contended that there was no story of<\/p>\n
identification or any indication about the source of identification in<\/p>\n
the fardbeyan but after over three years of the incident, the<\/p>\n
witnesses, who also appeared not making such statement before the<\/p>\n
police, made a statement in court that there was an electric bulb<\/p>\n
burning in the room in question and the witnesses identified the<\/p>\n
appellant in light thereof. It was contended, by referring to the<\/p>\n
evidence of different witnesses, that the attention of the witnesses<\/p>\n
was drawn to their respective statements on the above point and<\/p>\n
they claimed to have made that statement. That fact would have<\/p>\n
been proved or disproved by the examination of the Investigating<\/p>\n
Officer. Besides, the existence of the electric bulb in the place of<\/p>\n
occurrence room could also have been verified by the police officer<\/p>\n
who had inspected it. But his non-examination has materially<\/p>\n
prejudiced the appellants. It was further contended that even if
\n                                6<\/span><\/p>\n
assuming that it could be a circumstance which could be created by<\/p>\n
the evidence of witnesses, it was incumbent upon the learned trial<\/p>\n
judge to have put it as a question to the appellant during their<\/p>\n
examination under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure<\/p>\n
but a perusal of the recorded statement of the appellants at pages 63<\/p>\n
and 64 of the paper book, makes it evident that no such question<\/p>\n
was put to either of the appellants and still the court below has held<\/p>\n
that there was sufficient light and the appellants were duly<\/p>\n
identified therein. It was contended that the whole trial appears<\/p>\n
vitiated and the factum of identification must not be said to be<\/p>\n
established.\n<\/p>\n
9.    The second point which was raised before us, was the belated<\/p>\n
receipt of the first information report by the court below. It was<\/p>\n
contended that the FIR, having been drawn on 11.2.1987 and the<\/p>\n
place of occurrence being away by 12 kilometers from the court<\/p>\n
premises, it creates suspicion as to how it took two days to travel<\/p>\n
12 kilometers which is a distance covered by macadamized road<\/p>\n
and railways also. The possibility of concoction, due to deliberation<\/p>\n
and preparation of the document after consultation, may not be<\/p>\n
ruled out. It was contended by drawing our attention towards Ext. 2,<\/p>\n
the post mortem examination report, that the dead body was<\/p>\n
received at 2 P.M. on 11.2.1987 and the P.W. 6, the doctor, started<\/p>\n
the post mortem examination at around 4 P.M. but curiously<\/p>\n
enough, there is no case number or any reference as to in what<\/p>\n
connection the dead body had been received in the mortuary
\n                                7<\/span><\/p>\n
specially when the FIR had been drawn up on 11.2.1987 at 11.15<\/p>\n
A.M. It was contended in this connection that assuming that the<\/p>\n
Investigating Officer of the case who dispatched the dead body to<\/p>\n
the mortuary might not have mentioned the number of the case but<\/p>\n
he must have at least mentioned about the fardbeyan of the<\/p>\n
informant as a reference material for dispatching the dead body. It is<\/p>\n
contended that these two circumstances are so telling as to creating<\/p>\n
the biggest deficiency in the prosecution case and it was onerous<\/p>\n
upon the court below to have considered them and to have given<\/p>\n
benefit of doubt to the appellants.\n<\/p>\n
10.   Shri Abhimanyu Sharma, learned A.P.P. for the state has<\/p>\n
done the best he could under the circumstances of the case to<\/p>\n
convince us that even if the story of presence of an electric light at<\/p>\n
the place of occurrence is overruled, there could be sufficient<\/p>\n
evidence appearing from the prosecution case to hold that the<\/p>\n
prosecution witnesses had the opportunity of seeing the appellants<\/p>\n
and identifying them. Sri Sharma drew our attention towards the<\/p>\n
evidence of P.W. 5 in which he has stated that it was a moon lit<\/p>\n
night and has further submitted that the appellants were very closely<\/p>\n
standing by the witnesses, while the witnesses were being made to<\/p>\n
stand in the corner of the room and the appellants being villagers,<\/p>\n
they must have been picked up by the witnesses correctly. It was<\/p>\n
further contended that while they had arrived at the scene of the<\/p>\n
occurrence, they had been observed by the witnesses and that could<\/p>\n
have given sufficient opportunity to them for identifying them
\n                               8<\/span><\/p>\n
correctly. It was contended that the doctor found the corresponding<\/p>\n
injuries and the consistency is there in the evidence of witnesses<\/p>\n
and it was under the above circumstances that the learned trial judge<\/p>\n
was perfectly writing his judgment. It was contended, lastly, by<\/p>\n
Shri Sharma that not putting the circumstance of identification of<\/p>\n
the appellant in electric bulb might not be a circumstance which<\/p>\n
could be as important as to vitiate the judgment of conviction.<\/p>\n
11.   While hearing the present set of two appeals, we were taken<\/p>\n
through the evidence of witnesses, specially, P.Ws 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5<\/p>\n
who are not only the family members and the very close relatives of<\/p>\n
the deceased, but appeared also residing under the same roof of the<\/p>\n
house. It could not be very easy for a court to reject their evidence<\/p>\n
by holding that their presence at the place of occurrence could be<\/p>\n
doubtful. It was the dead of night. They were sleeping after having<\/p>\n
taken their meals and it could be reasonable for any one to assume<\/p>\n
that when any such exigency, as has been stated by the informant in<\/p>\n
his fardbeyan, would have appeared to them, they could have<\/p>\n
flocked together and there was no wonder that they had flocked<\/p>\n
together in the place- of- occurrence room. Their competence on<\/p>\n
that account, we do not doubt, except that they have given up the<\/p>\n
important part of the story while naming the appellants. They have<\/p>\n
named and also attributed specific overt acts to the two appellants,<\/p>\n
but did not whisper a single word as to what had happened of the<\/p>\n
four unknown persons who were accompanying the two appellants.<\/p>\n
Besides, what has struck us the most was that it could not be that
\n                               9<\/span><\/p>\n
the deceased was a good Samaritan. The materials available to us<\/p>\n
on record indicate as if he could be facing criminal charges of<\/p>\n
committing various offences. One person, as per the statement of<\/p>\n
P.W. 2, Ramdaiya Devi, had lodged the case of arson against him<\/p>\n
and the deceased was also facing a murder charge in the court of<\/p>\n
law. Ramdaiya Devi is the daughter in law of the deceased who was<\/p>\n
married to his younger son. It is true that the witnesses have denied<\/p>\n
that the deceased was not facing criminal charges, but we find it<\/p>\n
coming from the evidence that the deceased was facing multiple<\/p>\n
criminal charges in more than two criminal cases. He had been an<\/p>\n
accused indulging in a case of arson in a dwelling house and he had<\/p>\n
also been    charged for committing the murder of one of his<\/p>\n
villagers. Besides, P.W. 5 also appears being an accused in a case<\/p>\n
under the Arms Act as may appear from his own evidence in<\/p>\n
paragraph 10 though he has stated that the case was dismissed.<\/p>\n
Cases are dismissed on account of various reasons but the<\/p>\n
fundamental thing remains that one had been an accused for<\/p>\n
committing criminal act. As we find from the record, the possibility<\/p>\n
may be that the deceased could be having animus with many others.<\/p>\n
This is the most important aspect of the case which we have kept in<\/p>\n
our mind while considering and evaluating the evidence of the<\/p>\n
witnesses.\n<\/p>\n
12.   In the above background, we have proceeded to consider the<\/p>\n
evidence of identification. It was rightly submitted that Ext. 1 does<\/p>\n
not contain a whisper about any source of identification being
\n                                  10<\/span><\/p>\n
available at the site of incident. In fact, there is no statement in Ext.<\/p>\n
1 as to how the appellants or the accused persons were seen and<\/p>\n
identified. It was after more than three years when the witnesses<\/p>\n
were being examined in court that P.W. 5 in paragraph 2 of his<\/p>\n
deposition stated that an electric bulb was burning in his room and<\/p>\n
he identified the two appellants in the light thereof. His attention<\/p>\n
appears drawn to the above fact by suggesting to him that he had<\/p>\n
not made such statement to the Investigating Officer of the case and<\/p>\n
he was further cross-examined that he had shown the bulb to the<\/p>\n
Investigating Officer. Similarly, the attention of P.Ws. 2, 3 and 4<\/p>\n
was drawn to the above statement of theirs that they had not made<\/p>\n
such statements to the police.\n<\/p>\n
13.   We have appreciated the argument of learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellants and also that of the learned counsel for the state and<\/p>\n
perused the relevant paragraph 5 of the case diary, which contains<\/p>\n
the description of the place of occurrence and we find that there is<\/p>\n
no mention of finding of any electric bulb hanging or being fitted in<\/p>\n
the room in which the occurrence had taken place. All P.Ws have<\/p>\n
stated in their evidence that except the room in question other two –<\/p>\n
three rooms of the house had no such electric light fitted. Thus, we<\/p>\n
find that the witnesses had improved upon on the most material part<\/p>\n
of the prosecution story as regards the identification. We further<\/p>\n
perused the statement of these witnesses and we found that no such<\/p>\n
statement was recorded in the case diary and we could safely say
\n                                11<\/span><\/p>\n
that there was quite some improvement made by the witnesses as<\/p>\n
regards the identification of the accused persons in the light.<\/p>\n
14.   In the light of the serious challenge as we have discussed<\/p>\n
presently, we feel that it was important circumstance which was<\/p>\n
necessary to be explained by the accused and the court below ought<\/p>\n
to have put the circumstance so as to elicit explanation of the two<\/p>\n
appellants in their respective statements under section 313 of the<\/p>\n
Code of Criminal Procedure. The non-compliance of the provision<\/p>\n
of section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the above<\/p>\n
point, in our considered opinion, vitiates the trial and the finding of<\/p>\n
the court below as regards the identification of the appellants.<\/p>\n
15.   While perusing the case diary, we are also alive to another<\/p>\n
aspect of the appeal and the submission also, that the doors of the<\/p>\n
room were broken by being smashed by some heavy stone material.<\/p>\n
We may point out that the description of the place of occurrence as<\/p>\n
mentioned in paragraph 5 of the case diary does not find any<\/p>\n
mention in the evidence of the witnesses. There is no mention of<\/p>\n
the fact that the I.O. had found the door broken or any such material<\/p>\n
on the place of occurrence which could be matching in description<\/p>\n
with that which was allegedly utilized in smashing the door so as to<\/p>\n
break them open. Witnesses have sated in their evidence that as<\/p>\n
soon as the deceased and they all had closeted themselves into the<\/p>\n
room in question, the accused persons hammered the doors to break<\/p>\n
them open with Silwat and Musal. These are vital facts which
\n                               12<\/span><\/p>\n
appear materially touching upon the prosecution evidence<\/p>\n
adversely.\n<\/p>\n
16.   As regards other the argument on the belated receipt of the<\/p>\n
FIR, Ext. 6, by the magistrate, it was rightly submitted by the<\/p>\n
learned APP that the evidence of the I.O. could have been material<\/p>\n
in clarifying as to what was the reason under which the FIR could<\/p>\n
be dispatched and as such, was received belatedly by the magistrate.<\/p>\n
But, was not it the duty of the prosecution to call the witness for<\/p>\n
putting on this explanation and the explanatory material on the<\/p>\n
record of the case? Could it take advantage of its own laches<\/p>\n
specially when we have some satisfactory material to hold that for<\/p>\n
quite some time the police did not even know as to what was the<\/p>\n
case registered on that behalf and might be that it was still groping<\/p>\n
in dark as to what was the story to be placed before a court after<\/p>\n
satisfying its conscience as regards murder inside the house. Thus,<\/p>\n
we can say on various grounds and one that some basic record did<\/p>\n
not bear the number of the case. Inquest report and seizure memo<\/p>\n
were prepared much ahead of the time the FIR was drawn up but<\/p>\n
after the recording of Fardbeyan (Ext.1). But, what could be the<\/p>\n
explanation when one finds that the reference column in both<\/p>\n
Inquest Report and the postmortem examination report at their top<\/p>\n
do not bear any reference, even that to the fardbeyan of Sardar Ram.<\/p>\n
If the F.I.R. had not been drawn up by 2 P.M. or before 2 P.M., it<\/p>\n
would have been expected that the officer who was dispatching the<\/p>\n
dead body to the mortuary for postmortem examination, could have
\n                                13<\/span><\/p>\n
put down in the reference column of the dead body challan and the<\/p>\n
inquest report, the fardbeyan of Sardar Ram and it could have been<\/p>\n
sufficient compliance to the requirements of law and we could have<\/p>\n
also got sufficiently satisfied about its compliance. The very<\/p>\n
postmortem report, which is available on the record and also a copy<\/p>\n
of which is placed at pages 61 and 62 of the paper book, indicates<\/p>\n
that the dead body had been received from Sasaram Mufassil Police<\/p>\n
station in connection with a case, number of which has not been<\/p>\n
mentioned. The dead body was received at 2 P.M., as indicated<\/p>\n
above,   the same was seen by P.W. 6 at 3.30 P.M. and the<\/p>\n
examination started at 4 P.M. The very non-mentioning of the case<\/p>\n
number at the top right hand corner of the postmortem examination<\/p>\n
report creates a doubt that before 2 P.M. there was no FIR which<\/p>\n
had been shown drawn up at that time. This could be the reason that<\/p>\n
we find that the requirement of section 157 of the Code of Criminal<\/p>\n
Procedure had not been complied with as the copy of the document,<\/p>\n
Ext. 6, does not appear to be sent to the magistrate ‘forthwith’. We<\/p>\n
do not want to burden this judgment by citation on the importance<\/p>\n
of dispatching a copy of the FIR to the magistrate for the purpose<\/p>\n
of eliminating any possibility of concoction or of false implication.<\/p>\n
17.   We find it admitted that the deceased had been cited as<\/p>\n
witness in a criminal trial which was probably going on for the<\/p>\n
murder of the son of one of the appellants Kapil Sah. The deceased<\/p>\n
had refused to depose in the trial. It is alleged that the deceased had<\/p>\n
been threatened by the appellants. The purpose to state these facts
\n                               14<\/span><\/p>\n
is that it is a case purely based on suspicion that it could be the<\/p>\n
appellant Kapildeo      and his son Sudarshan who could have<\/p>\n
committed the murder of Sheopujan though the possibility exists<\/p>\n
that it could be many persons who could be settling their personal<\/p>\n
scores against the deceased for the reasons we have indicated just<\/p>\n
now.\n<\/p>\n
18.    After having discussed the evidence and the probabilities and<\/p>\n
the defect which afflicts the prosecution case,      we are of the<\/p>\n
considered view that it was a case in which benefit of doubt ought<\/p>\n
to have been given to the appellants. Accordingly, we extend the<\/p>\n
benefit of doubt to them. The Judgment of conviction passed by the<\/p>\n
learned trial judge and sentence inflicted on the appellants are set<\/p>\n
aside. The two appellants are acquitted after being given the benefit<\/p>\n
of doubt. Appellant Kapil Sah is on bail. He shall be discharged<\/p>\n
from the liabilities of his bail bond. Appellant Sudarshan Sah is in<\/p>\n
custody. He shall be released from custody if not wanted in any<\/p>\n
other case.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                            (Dharnidhar Jha, J.)<\/p>\n
                            (Rakesh Kumar, J.)<\/p>\n
Patna High Court,
\nThe 1st February,2010
\nNAFR\/Anil\/\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Patna High Court Kapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah vs State Of Bihar on 1 February, 2010 Author: Dharnidhar Jha CRIMINAL APPEAL No.64 OF 2003 DB With CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 265 OF 2003 DB ——- Against the judgment and order dated 21st January, 2003 passed by Shri Baleshwar Prasad Singh, Presiding officer, Addl. Court No. 1, […]<\/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":[8,26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-155580","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-patna-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nKapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah vs State Of Bihar on 1 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah vs State Of Bihar on 1 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-01-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-17T11:15:57+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=\"19 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah vs State Of Bihar on 1 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-17T11:15:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2\"},\"wordCount\":3709,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Patna High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2\",\"name\":\"Kapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah vs State Of Bihar on 1 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-17T11:15:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah vs State Of Bihar on 1 February, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Kapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah vs State Of Bihar on 1 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah vs State Of Bihar on 1 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-17T11:15:57+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":"19 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah vs State Of Bihar on 1 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-17T11:15:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2"},"wordCount":3709,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Patna High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2","name":"Kapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah vs State Of Bihar on 1 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-17T11:15:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kapil-sah-kapildeo-sah-vs-state-of-bihar-on-1-february-2010-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kapil Sah @ Kapildeo Sah vs State Of Bihar on 1 February, 2010"}]},{"@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\/155580","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=155580"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/155580\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=155580"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=155580"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=155580"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}