Supreme Court is all set to hear appeal after 24 years of acquittal by Trial Court, Gaya, 12 years after High Court reversed acquittal judgement

In The State of Bihar vs. Bhim Prasad @ Chuha and Gunjan Devi (2013), the judgement of Justice Mandhata Singh of the Patna High Court upon hearing Government Appeal of 2001 against the order and judgment of acquittal dated April 12, 2001 in connection with S.T. case of 2000 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Gaya, had set aside the order and judgment of acquittal and "remanded to the trial Court to decide the same afresh in accordance with law." The High Court had heard the case along with Criminal Revision No. 336 of 2001 Ganga Prasad vs. The State of Bihar, Bhim Prasad @ Chuha and Gunjan Devi. The High Court allowed the Government Appeal along with Revision.

Justice Singh's 8-page long judgement records that the Trial Court disbelieved the prosecution case because the Doctor, who initially examined and provided medical aid, was not examined in the case. The injury report bears the date when same was collected by the I.O. There is no mention in the injury report about bandage over all the injuries, as was observed by the Trial Judge. If that could have been the case then also receiving of injuries cannot be disbelieved for acquittal. Injuries are there. Victim was there to state that the assailant either both are one and circumstance existed about reluctance of appearing of other eye witnesses, so there could be no acquittal. The circumstance in favour of prosecution was that informant was examined in the case when he was admitted in hospital. 

The prosecution case initiated on fardbeyan of one Ganga Prasad, victim of the case, Prosecution Witness 2, with Criminal Revision no. 336 of 2001 dated September 7, 1999 after the F.I.R. was filed on July 7, 1998. The victim was going to deposit Rs.8000/- cash in Punjab National Bank, Dhami Tola Branch. He was keeping some papers in his bag also in connection with case pending in Court. As he proceeded 20 yards ahead near shop of Shivchand Mahuri and Madan Mahuri, he saw his younger brother Bhim Prasad @ Chuha and his wife Gunjan Devi having in their hand Bhujali. Two unknown persons aged about 25-30 years were also accompanying them. They were holding dragger and revolver. Chuha opened a fire thereafter flung him (P.W.2). He blew his Bhujali aiming his neck but in attempt to save his wrist of left hand was hit. His wife gave three Bhujali blows which hit his face on the left side of nose, palm, right hand and abdomen above waist. Chuha and two other unknown persons gave dragger blow causing injury at his knee of right leg, khili of both legs and panja. It was stated that Chuha fled taking his bag containing cash and papers. The victim became unconscious and recovered sense in hospital. Incident was supposedly witnessed by all the shop keepers other than his wife who was coming from behind. Regarding Chuha @ Bhim, it has been stated that he was a veteran criminal and Gunjan Devi his wife was also chargesheeted in several cases. After concluding the trial, case ended in acquittal of both the named accused persons, namely, Bhim Prasad @ Chuha and Gunjan Devi.  

The High Court has recorded that the Trial Court relied on hearsay evidence about assault by unknown criminals to disbelieve the prosecution case on the point of involvement of accused-respondents.

Justice Singh observed: "By issuance of injury report nature of the injury and weapon used can only be ascertained. It is for the Court to decide the real assailant, nature of the weapon used, nature of injuries received along with intention. In any case, acquittal cannot be justified." The High Court's judgement concluded:"his Government Appeal along with Revision is allowed. The order and judgment of acquittal dated 12.04.2001 in connection with S.T. No. 45 of 2000/228 of 2000 passed by the 5th Addl. Sessions Judge, Gaya is hereby set aside and case is remanded to the trial Court to decide the same afresh in accordance with law." 

The High Court's judgement was stayed by the Supreme Court's Division Bench of Justices K.S. Radhakrishnan and A. K Sikri on July 26, 2013 "for a period of one month". Subsequently, the stay was extended for the duration of the pendency of the appeal in the Supreme Court by order dated June 30, 2014. The appeal was filed in the Supreme Court on July 1, 2013. 

On January 30, 2025, Supreme Court's Division Bench had recorded in the order that Ms.Prerna Singh, the counsel appearing for the appellants (accused) stated that "she is unable to contact the appellants. Therefore, typed version of depositions and other relevant documents have not been placed on record in terms of order dated 9th January, 2025 of this Court." The Court appointed her as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court. She has been the counsel of the petitioner at least since January 2014.  

Prior to this on January 9, 2025, the Court had passed an order which reads: "Soft copy of the record of the Trial Court be provided to learned counsel appearing for the appellants. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants may place on record typed versions of the depositions and other relevant documents before the next date."

In a Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No(s).5695-5696/2013 arising from the judgement and order dated February 7, 2013 in CRA No.8/2001,CRA No.336/2001 of Patna High Court, Supreme Court's Division Bench of Justices K.S. Radhakrishnan and A. K Sikri had passed an order to stay the operation of the judgment of the High Court, "for a period of one month" on July 26, 2013. On June 30, 2014, the Supreme Court's Division Bench of Justices Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla and A.K. Sikri passed an order which reads: "Stay granted by this Court on 26th July, 2013 shall continue to remain in operation during the pendency of this appeal."

On March 6, 2025, Supreme Court's Division Bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan upon hearing in Bhim Prasad @ Chuha and Gunjan Devi vs. The State of Bihar and Ganga Devi Criminal Appeal No(s). 1284-1285/2014, recorded in the order that Prerna Singh, Advocate-on-Record that the appellants have contacted her and they would like to meet her and give instructions. List the Appeals on 27th March, 2025" almost 12 years after it was filed in the Supreme Court and 24 years after the acquittal judgement by the Trial Court, Gaya.