IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.416 of 2016 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2008 Thana- GOGRI District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1. Bijay Sah 2. Ajay Sah, Both Sons of Jagdish Sah 3. Madan Sah alias Jugnu Son of Rajendra Sah All Resident of Village Lakshmi Nagar Hat Gogri, Police Station Gogri, District Khagaria. ... ... Appellant/s Versus The State Of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 429 of 2016 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2008 Thana- GOGRI District- Khagaria ====================================================== Sumit Sah Son of Rajendra Sah Resident of village- Lakshmi Nagar Hat Gogri, Police Station- Gogri, District- Khagaria ... ... Appellant/s Versus The State Of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 416 of 2016) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Viveka Nandsingh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Abhay Kumar, A.P.P. (In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 429 of 2016) For the Appellant/s : Mr. Viveka Nandsingh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sri Shyed Ashfaque Ahmad, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 06-07-2026 1. Both the aforementioned appeals arise out of same Gogri P. S. Case No. 92 of 2008 and hence, with the consent of the parties, are being heard and disposed of by a common judgment. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.416 of 2016 dt.06-07-2026 2/5 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned Additional Public Prosecutors appearing for the State. 3. These appeals have been filed challenging the judgment of conviction dated 16.05.2016 and order of sentence dated 24.05.2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Khagaria in Sessions Trial No. 225 of 2009 in connection with Gogri P.S. Case No. 92 of 2008 whereby and whereunder appellants in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 416 of 2016 have been convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years with a fine of Rs. 5000/- each and appellant in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 429 of 2016 has been convicted under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo S.I. for six months. Further, these appellants have been convicted for committing offence under Section 427 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. All sentences have been directed to run concurrently. 4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that informant Kanti Devi alleges that on 09.07.2008 at about 8:30 A.M., her husband Jitendra Sah demanded repayment of Rs.280/- from appellant Bijay Sah, who had earlier borrowed the said amount. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.416 of 2016 dt.06-07-2026 3/5 This demand annoyed Bijay Sah, whereupon all the accused persons namely Ajay Sah, Bijay Sah, Madan Sah @ Jugnu and Sumit Sah arrived at the house of the informant armed with Khanti, lathi and iron rod. According to the prosecution, the accused persons surrounded Jitendra Sah and started abusing him. Thereafter, Ajay Sah allegedly assaulted him on the head with a Khanti, while Bijay Sah assaulted him with lathi causing injuries on his shoulder and hand. Madan Sah also assaulted him with lathi on different parts of his body with the intention to kill him. When the informant attempted to rescue her husband, appellant Sumit Sah, allegedly, pushed her to the ground, while Bijay Sah assaulted her with fists, causing injuries. It is further alleged that all the accused entered grocery shop of the informant and damaged food articles including maida, wheat, kalai, rice and pulses, thereby, causing loss to the shop. On alarm being raised, neighbours assembled and took the injured Jitendra Sah to a local doctor and thereafter to the Referral Hospital, Gogri, where fardbeyan of informant Kanti Devi was recorded. On the basis of the said fardbeyan, Gogri P.S. Case No. 92 of 2008 was instituted under Sections 341, 323, 307, 427 and 354 IPC. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons under Sections 341, 323, 307, 427 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.416 of 2016 dt.06-07-2026 4/5 and 354 IPC. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions where charges were framed. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 5. In this case, in order to bring home guilt of these appellants, the prosecution has examined altogether six witnesses. P.W. 1 Rajendra Gupta, who is a co-villager, was declared hostile. P.W. 2, namely, Sanjay Sah claims to be an eye witness of the occurrence and identified appellants Ajay Sah, Bijay Sah and co-accused Madan Sah in court. P.W. 3, namely, Jitendra Sah is the injured victim and husband of informant. P.W. 4, namely, Kanti Devi is the injured informant. P.W. 5, namely, Amarnath Jha is the Investigating Officer and P.W. 6, Dr. Arun Kumar Sinha is the Medical Officer who examined both the injured persons and found that injuries sustained by the informant Kanti Devi are simple in nature whereas, all the injuries sustained by P.W. 3 are simple except one head injury, which was found to be grievous. 6. On the other hand, the defence has not produced any oral evidence. However, the defence produced Exhibit-A, being certified copy of the F.I.R. in Gogri P. S. Case No. 114 of 2008, instituted on the complaint of Kiran Devi, wife of appellant Bijay Sah, alleging commission of rape by the son of Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.416 of 2016 dt.06-07-2026 5/5 informant. 7. From the evidence adduced, it appears that both the parties are neigbours and the occurrence took place on the spur of the moment over a minor dispute and in the facts of the case it does not appear to be a case under Section 307 IPC. 8. In that view of the matter, the impugned judgment of conviction dated 16.05.2016 is converted to one under Section 323 IPC with regard to the appellants in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 416 of 2016 and sentence awarded to all the above named appellants is reduced to the period already undergone by them during trial. 9. Appellants, above named, are discharged from the liability of the bail bonds in connection with this case. 10. Accordingly, these appeals stand disposed of. 11. Interlocutory application/s, if any, also stands disposed of. Navya/- (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 10.07.2026 Transmission Date 10.07.2026