Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Md. Raquibui Son of Late Md. Ishahaque Vs.

Md. Raquibui Son of Late Md. Ishahaque vs State of Bihar

Type Court Judgment Court Patna Decided May 16, 2011
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/917813

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Patna High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.294 OF 1996
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 307, 324, 325

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Md. Raquibui Son of Late Md. Ishahaque

Advocate Mr. Mani Bhushan Kumar, Mr. Anil Chandra, Advs.

Respondent

State of Bihar

Advocate Dr. Indiwar Kumari, Adv.

Legal References

Acts
Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 307, 324, 325

Excerpt

1. the appellant has been convicted under sections 307 and 324 of the indian penal code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years by a judgment dated 29.11.1996 in sessions trial no. 203 of 1994/27 of 1994 passed by the additional district & sessions judge, muzaffarpur. 2. the case of the prosecution is that on 28.6.1993, an altercation arose between the appellant and the informant and he along with his wife came and assaulted the informant with farsa and dagger. 3. the prosecution in all examined ten witnesses out of whom pw-1 stated in his cross-examination that he had no knowledge why the altercation had taken place. pw-4 and pw-7 have declared hostile whereas pw-5 and pw-6 are formal 2 witnesses. pw-9 is the doctor who examined the injured and pw-8 is informant. pw-10 is a formal witness. 4. on going through the analysis of evidence, i find that only the informant and his wife (pw-2) have supported the case of the prosecution but their evidence is completely trustworthy and there is no material contradiction which would belie their testimony.  further, the evidence of the doctor (pw-9) also objectively corroborates the prosecution case.   5. however, in the manner of occurrence described  by  the prosecution, this court is unable to sustain the conviction of the  appellant under section 307 of the indian penal code and,  therefore, it is converted to one under section 325 of the indian  penal code and  his sentences modified to the period already  undergone by him during trial. in addition the appellant (if alive) will deposit a fine of rs. 2,000/- within a period of eight weeks from the date of the notice from the trial court and if he fails to do so, he shall be sentenced to a period of three months. this amount shall be paid to the complainant/his family by the trial court. 6. in the result, the appeal is dismissed with the aforesaid modification.

Full Judgment

1. The Appellant has been convicted under Sections 307 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for ten years by a Judgment dated 29.11.1996 in Sessions Trial No. 203 of 1994/27 of 1994 passed by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 28.6.1993, an altercation arose between the Appellant and the Informant and he along with his wife came and assaulted the Informant with Farsa and dagger.

3. The prosecution in all examined ten witnesses out of whom PW-1 stated in his cross-examination that he had no knowledge why the altercation had taken place. PW-4 and PW-7 have declared hostile whereas PW-5 and PW-6 are formal 2 witnesses. PW-9 is the Doctor who examined the injured and PW-8 is Informant. PW-10 is a formal witness.

4. On going through the analysis of evidence, I find that only the Informant and his wife (PW-2) have supported the case of the prosecution but their evidence is completely trustworthy and there is no material contradiction which would belie their testimony.  Further, the evidence of the Doctor (PW-9) also objectively corroborates the prosecution case.  

5. However, in the manner of occurrence described  by  the prosecution, this Court is unable to sustain the conviction of the  Appellant under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and,  therefore, it is converted to one under Section 325 of the Indian  Penal Code and  his sentences modified to the period already  undergone by him during trial. In addition the Appellant (if alive) will deposit a fine of Rs. 2,000/- within a period of eight weeks from the date of the notice from the Trial Court and if he fails to do so, he shall be sentenced to a period of three months. This amount shall be paid to the Complainant/his family by the Trial Court.

6. In the result, the Appeal is dismissed with the aforesaid modification.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial