{"id":209235,"date":"2008-07-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-07-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008"},"modified":"2016-06-26T17:40:06","modified_gmt":"2016-06-26T12:10:06","slug":"the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008","title":{"rendered":"The State Of Bihar vs Md. Azimuddin on 15 July, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Patna High Court<\/div>\n
The State Of Bihar vs Md. Azimuddin on 15 July, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: Shiva Kirti Singh<\/div>\n
                                             DEATH REFERANCE No.11 OF 2006\n\n\n                    THE STATE OF BIHAR----------------------------------------------------------------Appellant.\n                                                           Versus\n                    MD. AZIMUDDIN---------------------------------------------------------------------Respondent.\n                                                            With\n\n                                                CR. APP (DB) No.1225 OF 2006\n\n                    MD.AZIMUDDIN------------------------------------------------------------------------Appellant.\n                                                            Versus\n                    STATE OF BIHAR---------------------------------------------------------------------Respondent.\n\n                                                             ------------\n<\/pre>\n
               Reference made by Sri Baleshwar Sharma, Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court
\n               No.1, Supaul vide Letter No.264 dated 15.12.2006 and appeal against the Judgment and
\n               Order dated 18th of November, 2006 passed in Sessions Trial No.165 of 1996.<\/p>\n
                                                             ——–\n<\/p>\n
               For the Appellant         : M\/s. Arun and Sanjay Kumar @ S.K. Advocates.\n               For the State             : Mr. Ashwani Kumar Sinha, A.P.P.\n\n                                                               --------\n\n\n                                                          PRESENT\n\n                                   THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH\n                                  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHIJIT SINHA\n\nShiva Kirti Singh &\nAbhijit Sinha,JJ.                  The Death Reference and the Criminal Appeal under consideration arise out\n\n<\/pre>\n
               of the same Judgment and Order dated 18th of November, 2006 passed in Sessions Trial<\/p>\n
               No.165 of 1996(arising out of Raghopur P.S. Case No.101 of 1995, corresponding to G.R.<\/p>\n
               No.509 of 1995) by learned Addditional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Supaul ,<\/p>\n
               whereby appellant Md. Azimuddin aged about 52 years was convicted under Section 302<\/p>\n
               I.P.C. and sentenced to death.\n<\/p>\n
               2.                The substance of the prosecution case as contained in the fardbeyan (Ext.2) of<\/p>\n
               P.W.6, Shahnawaz Khan, a son of the deceased, Md. Shamshad, is that on 28.9.1995 at<\/p>\n
               about 7.15 P.M. the deceased came to his house and asked the informant to serve him meal as<\/p>\n
               his wife had gone to her parent\u201fs house. While the informant, P.W.6 was taking out meal,<\/p>\n
               the appellant, Md. Azimuddin along with Nooruddin (absconding accused) came in the house
\n                                               2<\/span><\/p>\n
and questioned Md. Shamshad(deceased) as to why he had got \u201eMadarsa\u201f belonging to Md.<\/p>\n
Azimuddin demolished . The appellant was armed with pistol and bhujali (sharp cutting and<\/p>\n
penetrating weapon).      Md. Shamshad denied the allegations.      The appellant asked the<\/p>\n
deceased to come for talk at the house of Md. Illiyas (P.W.5). The deceased went out with<\/p>\n
the accused and the informant (P.W.6) followed them. On reaching near the house of Motiur<\/p>\n
Rahman (P.W.2), Md. Azimuddin abused Motiur Rahman in loud voice and also abused Md.<\/p>\n
Shamshad(deceased) that he had got his house(Madarsa) demolished . The informant was at<\/p>\n
a distance of about 10 yards behind them near the shop of Md. Mannan. Two other accused,<\/p>\n
namely, Md. Zamrul and Bhola Mian of same village were also standing near the house of<\/p>\n
Md. Illiyas.     While abusing, suddenly Azimuddin cried “Allah Ho Akbar” and shot at Md.<\/p>\n
Shamshad with a country made pistol causing injuries on chest. Md. Shamshad fell down.<\/p>\n
Thereafter Azimuddin further assaulted with bhujali causing injuries in the left hand and on<\/p>\n
the left side of the head of the deceased. Md. Shamshad died at the place of occurrence. The<\/p>\n
other accused Md. Nooruddin was helping the appellant by flashing torch light on the body<\/p>\n
of Md. Shamshad (deceased). When the informant wanted to go near his father, the appellant<\/p>\n
rushed towards him and shouted to catch and kill the informant. The informant ran back and<\/p>\n
hid in the house of Md. Mannan. The appellant and Nooruddin went there to search the<\/p>\n
informant but Anwari Begum (P.W.7), wife of Md. Mannan, came down and hid the<\/p>\n
informant in her room and the accused persons went back to the house of Motiur Rahman<\/p>\n
where they hurled abuses and tried to break open the door of his house but on being<\/p>\n
unsuccessful they went to the house of Md. Illiyas. The house of Md. Illiyas was already<\/p>\n
surrounded by Md. Zamrul and Bhola Mian. They wanted to break open the door of the<\/p>\n
house of Md. Illiyas but in the mean time they heard the arrival of police party and hence fled<\/p>\n
away towards south. The police party was accompanied by Sub-Inspector of Police, R.K.<\/p>\n
Singh (P.W.8) who recorded the fardbeyan of the informant (P.W.6) and took up<\/p>\n
investigation.\n<\/p>\n
                                               3<\/span><\/p>\n
3.             The Investigating Officer (P.W.8) inspected the place of occurrence, prepared<\/p>\n
the inquest report of the deceased and sent the dead body for post-mortem examination.<\/p>\n
Subsequently, he recorded the statement of witnesses, obtained the post-mortem report and<\/p>\n
after completing investigation submitted chargesheet against the appellant and three others<\/p>\n
for offences under Sections 302\/34 I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Initially the<\/p>\n
appellant and Md. Zamrul and Bhola Mian were shown as absconders in the chargesheet and<\/p>\n
the case progressed only in respect of co-accused, Nooruddin. Later the appellant was taken<\/p>\n
into custody in connection with another case and then remanded in this case. His case which<\/p>\n
had been separated earlier was amalgamated and it appears that later Md. Nooruddin also<\/p>\n
absconded and only the appellant could be put on trial. During the trial he denied the charges<\/p>\n
framed against him. His defence is only of false implication as appears from suggestion<\/p>\n
given to the witnesses. It was also the defence of the appellant that the deceased, Md.<\/p>\n
Shamshad was killed by his brothers due to family dispute and the appellant has been<\/p>\n
implicated by his enemies by taking the informant in collusion.        The defence has not<\/p>\n
examined any witness nor has brought on record any documentary evidence.<\/p>\n
4.             The prosecution in order to prove the charge has examined in total 9<\/p>\n
witnesses. P.W.1, Moijur Rahman, P.W.2, Motiur Rahman, P.W.3, Md. Mannan, P.W.4,<\/p>\n
Abdul Rashid and P.W.5, Md. Illiyas are co-villagers and their houses are in the vicinity of<\/p>\n
the place of the occurrence. They have deposed in support of the prosecution case by<\/p>\n
claiming to have seen the entire occurrence, or to have seen part of the occurrence after they<\/p>\n
heard loud abuses hurled by the accused persons and some of the witnesses saw the later part<\/p>\n
of the occurrence after the deceased had been shot. They heard the sound of firing and then<\/p>\n
saw the occurrence thereafter in which they saw the appellant inflicting injury on the neck<\/p>\n
and other parts of the body of the deceased with a bhujali, a sharp cutting weapon. P.W.6,<\/p>\n
Md. Shahnawaz Khan is son of the deceased and informant of this case.      He has claimed to<\/p>\n
be an eye witness of the alleged occurrence and has supported the case fully against this<\/p>\n
appellant as alleged in the F.I.R. P.W.7, Anwari Begum is wife of P.W.3, Md. Mannan, and
\n                                                 4<\/span><\/p>\n
as claimed by the informant in the fardbeyan, she has supported his case that when he was<\/p>\n
chased by the accused persons he was given shelter by P.W.7 who allowed him to enter<\/p>\n
into her house and hide himself. P.W.8 is the Investigating Officer of the case, Sub-<\/p>\n
inspector of Police, Randhir Kumar Singh and P.W.9 is Dr. Ajay Kumar Manjhi who<\/p>\n
conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased and found one fire arm injury with<\/p>\n
charring margin which in his opinion was from close range and also two incised injuries, one<\/p>\n
on the neck and the other on the wrist. Some of the important documents on record are<\/p>\n
Ext.2, fardbeyan, Ext.3, the formal F.I.R., Ext.4, the inquest report, Ext.5, the chargesheet<\/p>\n
and Ext.6, the post-mortem report.\n<\/p>\n
5.             Learned counsel for the appellant has criticized the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2,<\/p>\n
who are co-villagers that they had claimed before the I.O. that they came after hearing the<\/p>\n
sound of firing. Against P.W.4, Abdul Rashid, it was submitted that in his earlier statement<\/p>\n
to the I.O. to which his attention was drawn during cross examination, this witness had<\/p>\n
admitted to be at the Masjid and that he had received information of the occurrence there<\/p>\n
and then he came to the P.O. Regarding P.W.6, the informant, it was submitted that he has<\/p>\n
made improvement upon his earlier version in the fardbeyan by adding the names of co-<\/p>\n
accused, Bhola Mian and Zamrul amongst the names of accused who had come to the house<\/p>\n
of the informant and the deceased at the initial stage. The said criticism is correct but it is of<\/p>\n
no material consequence so far as prosecution case against this appellant is concerned. The<\/p>\n
initial case of the prosecution in the fardbeyan was that this appellant and Nooruddin had<\/p>\n
come inside the house of the deceased and Bhola alongwith Zamrul were near the place of<\/p>\n
occurrence and guarding the house of Md. Illiyas and Motiur Rahman. The case against<\/p>\n
appellant has remained consistent even during deposition of the informant in court.<\/p>\n
6.             It is unnecessary to discuss the earlier criticism levelled against particular<\/p>\n
witnesses in greater detail because it is clear that the informant had seen the occurrence with<\/p>\n
his own eyes and has consistently deposed that it was this appellant who fired due to which<\/p>\n
his father fell down and thereafter it was this appellant who caused further injury to his father
\n                                                5<\/span><\/p>\n
with bhujali. This version is supported by another eye witness, P.W.3, Md. Mannan, whose<\/p>\n
house stands in close vicinity and who saw the occurrence from the southern window after<\/p>\n
hearing the commotion and abuses. P.W.3 has not been cross examined in respect of his<\/p>\n
earlier statement before the I.O. and there is nothing in his cross examination to discredit his<\/p>\n
testimony as an eye witness. The Investigating Officer (I.O.), P.W.8, has given the details of<\/p>\n
the investigation conducted by him. Further,        he has disclosed that there were 13 cases<\/p>\n
pending against the appellant who had absconded in some of those cases. He has also stated<\/p>\n
in paragraph 27 of his deposition that he had found blood mark on the earth at the place of<\/p>\n
occurrence. From the I.O. it has been taken in cross examination that the distance of Supaul<\/p>\n
from Raghopur P.S. is about 35 kilometers and both are connected by metalled road. The<\/p>\n
time taken to cover the distance by bus and taxi is 1 to 1 \u00bd hours. The medical evidence as<\/p>\n
deposed by Dr. A.K. Manjhi, P.W.9, shows the presence of anti mortem injuries on the dead<\/p>\n
body of the deceased. The incised wound on the left lateral side of face and extending to the<\/p>\n
neck behind the left ear cutting skin, muscles , left mandible bone and other major blood<\/p>\n
vessels was of the size of 6″x 3″x 3″ . The other incised wound on the left lateral side of the<\/p>\n
wrist joint cutting skin vessels tendon etc. was of the size of 1 \u00bd” x 1″ x 1″ and the third<\/p>\n
injury was an oval shaped wound with blackening and charring margin of the size 3\/4″ x 1\/2″<\/p>\n
x thoracic cavity deep over the anterior aspect of the left side of the chest wall above the<\/p>\n
mammary gland. In the opinion of the doctor the cause of death was haemorrhage and shock<\/p>\n
leading to cardiac respiratory failure due to injury no.1 caused by sharp cutting weapon, may<\/p>\n
be by bhujali. Injury No.3 on the left side of the chest was by fire arms. The doctor<\/p>\n
recovered 11 pellets from the dead body which were preserved. In the opinion of the doctor<\/p>\n
the injuries found on the dead body of the deceased were sufficient to cause death in the<\/p>\n
ordinary course of nature. The post- mortem examination was conducted on 29.9.1995 at 8<\/p>\n
A.M and the time elapsed since death was estimated to be within 24 hours.<\/p>\n
7.             Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that although the appellant<\/p>\n
was charged for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. but ultimately he
\n                                                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 simplicitor and hence the conviction is<\/p>\n
bad in law.\n<\/p>\n
8.             Learned counsel for the State has replied that such irregularity in framing the<\/p>\n
charge cannot affect the conviction unless it has caused prejudice to the accused and in the<\/p>\n
present case the prosecution is consistent in alleging against the appellant that he fired shot<\/p>\n
causing injury to the deceased and further caused serious injury near the neck and other<\/p>\n
portions of the body of the deceased. According to the learned counsel for the State Section<\/p>\n
464 of the Code of Criminal Procedure takes care of such irregularity in framing of charge.<\/p>\n
In the facts of the case, we find merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the State.<\/p>\n
9.             It was next submitted on behalf of the appellant that the F.I.R. was shown to<\/p>\n
have been prepared on 28.9.1995 at 21.45 hours and it ought to have been              sent to the<\/p>\n
concerned Magistrate at Supaul which was only at a distance of 35 kilometers, on 29.9.1995<\/p>\n
but records of the case show that the F.I.R. was perused by the Magistrate on 30.9.1995.<\/p>\n
The aforesaid submission is no doubt based on the materials on record but delay of one day<\/p>\n
in receiving and perusal of the F.I.R. by the Magistrate itself cannot be sufficient to<\/p>\n
disbelieve the prosecution case unless there are other facts and the circumstances to raise<\/p>\n
reasonable doubts that the prosecution has taken advantage of such a delay and possibily it<\/p>\n
was done deliberately to ante date the fardbeyan and the F.I.R. In the present case it is found<\/p>\n
that police reached at the place of occurrence and recorded the fardbeyan within about one<\/p>\n
hour of the occurrence. According to the fardbeyan the occurrence took place on 28.9.1995<\/p>\n
at 7.15 P.M. (19.15 hours) and the fardbeyan was recorded on the same date at 20.20 hours at<\/p>\n
the place of occurrence. The alleged place of occurrence was at a distance of 4 kilometers<\/p>\n
from the police station and hence the fardbeyan appears to have been recorded at appropriate<\/p>\n
time. The inquest report (Ext.4) was prepared by the I.O. on the same date at 20.45 hours.<\/p>\n
According to the evidence of the I.O. the dead body was sent to Supaul for post-mortem<\/p>\n
examination and the post-mortem report was received by the I.O. The said report has been<\/p>\n
proved by the doctor, P.W.9 (Ext.6). The reading of Ext.6 shows that the dead body of the
\n                                                7<\/span><\/p>\n
deceased was received for post-mortem examination on 29.9.1995 at 7.20 A.M. in<\/p>\n
connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No.101 of 1995 dated 28.9.1995. The dead body was<\/p>\n
seen by the doctor at 7.35 A.M. and the post-mortem commenced at 8 A.M. on 29.9.1995. It<\/p>\n
is further found that in this case there is no scope to raise any doubt regarding identity of the<\/p>\n
accused persons including the appellant because they were known to the prosecution<\/p>\n
witnesses and the informant from before. The appellant and the prosecution party are co-<\/p>\n
villagers. The defence case is only of false implication and not that the occurrence took<\/p>\n
place at some other place or at other time. From the cross examination of the witnesses, it is<\/p>\n
clear that the defence has not made any serious challenge to the time and place of the<\/p>\n
occurrence. In such circumstances, the delay of one day in perusal of the F.I.R. by the<\/p>\n
Magistrate has not caused any prejudice to the prosecution case.\n<\/p>\n
10.            On the basis of questions put to witnesses during cross examination, it was<\/p>\n
submitted that some of the witnesses have indicated that on the date of occurrence the<\/p>\n
weather was inclement. On that account it has been submitted that the weather was bad and<\/p>\n
visibility must be poor and hence the claim of identification in moon lit night must be<\/p>\n
doubted. The occurrence took place towards the end of the month of September and weather<\/p>\n
during that time starts turning cold. P.W.7 has explained that the weather was bad in the<\/p>\n
sense that strong wind was blowing on that date but so far as conditions of the sky is<\/p>\n
concerned, all the witnesses are consistent that it was a moon lit night and it has come in the<\/p>\n
F.I.R. also that one of the co-accused was flashing a torch light at the dead body of the victim<\/p>\n
in order to facilitate further assault by the accused. Hence the submission that weather was<\/p>\n
inclement so as to effect the visibility and chance of identification does not have any<\/p>\n
substance. As noticed earlier, the appellant is a co-villager of the informant and witnesses<\/p>\n
and being known from before there could be no difficulty in identification of the appellant<\/p>\n
particularly when he is shown to have come inside the house of the informant and then the<\/p>\n
deceased accompanied him on pressure put by the appellant. In such circumstances, as
\n                                                 8<\/span><\/p>\n
already observed earlier, there is no difficulty in holding that in this case the identification of<\/p>\n
the appellant is not at all in doubt.\n<\/p>\n
11.             A serious attempt was made to take us through the deposition of the witnesses<\/p>\n
to show that at the time of occurrence they were in their houses or standing outside and<\/p>\n
hence from such long distance they could not have seen the occurrence. On this issue,<\/p>\n
P.W.1 appears to have been questioned about the distance of his house from the house of the<\/p>\n
informant to which he has replied that the said distance is 1 and 1\/2 jarib (700 yards). In<\/p>\n
paragraphs 1 and 2 of his deposition this witness has claimed that at the time of taking dinner<\/p>\n
in his house he heard hulla and came out and heard the voice of the appellant abusing<\/p>\n
Shamshad. Then he heard the sound of gun shot and he went there. 2 to 4 persons joined<\/p>\n
him. He reached near the coconut tree near the house of Motiur Rahman(P.W.2) . He saw<\/p>\n
Shamshad lying on the ground there and the appellant was slitting his throat with a dagger.<\/p>\n
However, the I.O., P.W.8, has contradicted this witness and has clarified that P.W.1 had not<\/p>\n
stated before him that he saw the appellant slitting the throat of Shamshad rather he had<\/p>\n
stated that he went near the place of occurrence after arrival of police there. Hence, P.W.1<\/p>\n
can only be treated as a witness corroborating the prosecution case that prior to assault the<\/p>\n
appellant was hurling abuses to the deceased. P.W.2 was also cross examined about the<\/p>\n
distance of P.O. from his house to which he has given a categorical reply that the said<\/p>\n
distance is only 10 to 12 yards. To similar question P.W.3 has replied that the place of<\/p>\n
occurrence is at a distance of 50-60 steps from his house and no house exists in between.<\/p>\n
P.W.4 has stated before the I.O. that at the time of occurrence he was at the masjid where he<\/p>\n
received information about the occurrence. That masjid according to this witness was at a<\/p>\n
distance of 50-60 yards from the place of occurrence. This witness claims to have seen part<\/p>\n
of the occurrence from the distance of 10-12 yards from near the house of P.W.2, Motihur<\/p>\n
Rahman.     P.W.5, Md. Illiyas , has given the distance of his house from the place of<\/p>\n
occurrence as only 15 steps and according to the informant, P.W.6, his house is at a distance<\/p>\n
of 20-25 steps from the place of occurrence. According to P.W.7, Anwari Begum, her house
\n                                                 9<\/span><\/p>\n
is at a distance of 10-15 steps from the place of occurrence. On a careful perusal of the<\/p>\n
distance given by the witnesses, as noticed above, it appears that the houses of these<\/p>\n
witnesses except P.W.1 are located very close from the place of occurrence from where they<\/p>\n
could have easily heard the noise as well as abuses and on coming out from their houses or<\/p>\n
through windows they could have witnessed the occurrence itself.<\/p>\n
12.            It is useful to notice that all the witnesses are co-villagers and some of them<\/p>\n
have disclosed relationship with this appellant whereas some are related to the deceased also.<\/p>\n
P.W.7, Motiur Rahman, has disclosed that he is the brother-in-law of the deceased and own<\/p>\n
cousin of the appellant. P.W.3, Md. Mannan, has claimed to be mausera bhai(cousin) of the<\/p>\n
deceased. P.W.4, Abdul Rashid, has accepted to be a distant relation of the deceased.<\/p>\n
P.W.5, Md. Illiyas, has disclosed that the appellant is cousin of his wife. P.W.7, Anwari<\/p>\n
Begum, as noticed earlier, is wife of P.W.3.        The defence failed to bring on record any<\/p>\n
documentary evidence to show past litigation or enmity specially with the informant and<\/p>\n
hence there is no merit in the argument that the appellant may have been implicated on<\/p>\n
account of previous enmity.     On a careful consideration of all the materials on record we<\/p>\n
find that the trial court has committed no error in convicting the appellant for the charge<\/p>\n
under Section 302 I.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
13.            On behalf of the appellant it was submitted that the special reasons given by<\/p>\n
the trial court for awarding death sentence to the appellant are not good reasons for awarding<\/p>\n
the extreme penalty of death and there are no special circumstances to treat the offence in<\/p>\n
question as rarest of rare so as to warrant death penalty to the appellant.<\/p>\n
14.            There is no difficulty that the law as held by the Constitution Bench of the<\/p>\n
Apex Court in the case of Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1980 S.C. 898 requires<\/p>\n
special reasons for awarding death penalty. This is also the mandate of Section 354(b) of the<\/p>\n
Cr.P.C. It is also well settled in law that the death penalty should be awarded only in the<\/p>\n
rarest of the rare cases where the judicial conscience is         convinced that award of life<\/p>\n
imprisonment cannot be adequate punishment for the crime in question. Applying the same
\n                                               10<\/span><\/p>\n
settled principles to the facts of the case we find that as per prosecution case itself, the<\/p>\n
appellant was in a highly agitated state of mind because he believed that his house (madarsa)<\/p>\n
had been forcibly broken down by some co-villagers and the deceased was a party to such an<\/p>\n
act. On account of such agitation the appellant has caused the death of one person and such<\/p>\n
crime cannot be said to be the rarest of rare cases. The only aggravating circumstance<\/p>\n
against the appellant is the manner of assault. After causing a fire arm injury in the chest he<\/p>\n
felt dissatisfied and proceeded to inflict serious cut injury near the neck of the deceased and<\/p>\n
also on the left wrist. Apparently, he wanted to ensure that there was no chance of survival<\/p>\n
of the deceased. It is apparent that on the ground of such cruelty and his attempt to chase the<\/p>\n
informant also with a view to assault or kill him, the learned trial court has awarded death<\/p>\n
sentence to the appellant. The cruelty in the manner of committing the crime in this case is,<\/p>\n
no doubt, some- what shocking to the conscience. But that by itself, in the facts of the case,<\/p>\n
should not bring the offence in the category of the rarest of rare cases and hence in our view<\/p>\n
it is not a case where death penalty alone can be sufficient for punishment.<\/p>\n
15.             Hence, while maintaining the conviction of the appellant, we commute the<\/p>\n
death sentence into life imprisonment. With this modification in the sentence, the criminal<\/p>\n
appeal preferred by the appellant is dismissed and the Death Reference is answered in<\/p>\n
negative.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                    (Shiva Kirti Singh,J)<\/p>\n
                                                                    (Abhijit Sinha,J)<\/p>\n
Patna High Court, Patna.\n<\/p>\n
Dated:The 15th of July, 2008.\n<\/p>\n
Pradeep Srivastava\/A.F.R.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Patna High Court The State Of Bihar vs Md. Azimuddin on 15 July, 2008 Author: Shiva Kirti Singh DEATH REFERANCE No.11 OF 2006 THE STATE OF BIHAR—————————————————————-Appellant. Versus MD. AZIMUDDIN———————————————————————Respondent. With CR. APP (DB) No.1225 OF 2006 MD.AZIMUDDIN————————————————————————Appellant. Versus STATE OF BIHAR———————————————————————Respondent. ———— Reference made by Sri Baleshwar Sharma, Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court […]<\/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-209235","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-patna-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe State Of Bihar vs Md. Azimuddin on 15 July, 2008 - 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\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The State Of Bihar vs Md. Azimuddin on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-26T12:10:06+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\\\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The State Of Bihar vs Md. Azimuddin on 15 July, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-26T12:10:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008\"},\"wordCount\":3784,\"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\\\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008\",\"name\":\"The State Of Bihar vs Md. Azimuddin on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-26T12:10:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The State Of Bihar vs Md. Azimuddin on 15 July, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"The State Of Bihar vs Md. Azimuddin on 15 July, 2008 - 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\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The State Of Bihar vs Md. Azimuddin on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-26T12:10:06+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\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The State Of Bihar vs Md. Azimuddin on 15 July, 2008","datePublished":"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-26T12:10:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008"},"wordCount":3784,"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\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008","name":"The State Of Bihar vs Md. Azimuddin on 15 July, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-07-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-26T12:10:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-state-of-bihar-vs-md-azimuddin-on-15-july-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The State Of Bihar vs Md. Azimuddin on 15 July, 2008"}]},{"@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\/209235","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=209235"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/209235\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=209235"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=209235"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=209235"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}