Supreme Court Restores Conviction in High-Profile Bihar Murder Case
The Supreme Court of India, in Rama Devi v. State of Bihar & Others, delivered a critical ruling on October 3, 2024, restoring the conviction of two accused in the high-profile murders of Brij Bihari Prasad, a Bihar MLA, and his bodyguard, Lakshmeshwar Sahu. The Court overturned the Patna High Court’s decision, which had acquitted the accused, and reaffirmed the judgment of the trial court.
Background of the Case
The case involved the assassination of Brij Bihari Prasad, a former Minister of Science & Technology in Bihar, who was shot dead on June 13, 1998, at Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences (IGIMS), Patna, while in judicial custody. His bodyguard, Lakshmeshwar Sahu, was also killed in the attack.
Chronology of Events
- June 13, 1998 (6:30 p.m.): The victim, along with visitors and security personnel, was taking a walk outside the hospital ward.
- June 13, 1998 (8:15 p.m.): Two vehicles, a Sumo and an Ambassador, entered the hospital premises. Armed assailants stepped out and opened fire on Brij Bihari Prasad and his bodyguard.
- June 13, 1998 (9:00 p.m.): FIR No. 336/1998 was registered under multiple sections of the IPC and the Arms Act.
- June 14, 1998: Autopsy confirmed death due to multiple gunshot wounds.
- July 2014: The Patna High Court overturned the trial court’s conviction and acquitted all accused due to lack of credible evidence.
- October 3, 2024: The Supreme Court restored the conviction of two accused and upheld the acquittal of others.
Petitioner’s Arguments (Rama Devi & CBI)
The petitioner, represented by Senior Advocate R. Venkataramani, argued:
- The High Court erred in disbelieving the testimony of four eyewitnesses, which had been relied upon by the trial court.
- The forensic and ballistic evidence corroborated the prosecution’s case.
- The accused were part of a politically motivated assassination plot.
- The High Court’s decision was based on minor inconsistencies and failed to appreciate the overwhelming evidence.
Respondent’s Arguments (Accused Persons)
The accused, represented by Senior Advocate Ujjwal Nikam, countered:
- The FIR was ante-timed and registered under political pressure.
- Key eyewitnesses were interested witnesses and had conflicting testimonies.
- There was no independent witness corroborating the prosecution’s story.
- Failure to recover the murder weapon weakened the case.
Supreme Court’s Analysis and Judgment
Restoring Conviction
The Supreme Court ruled that the Patna High Court wrongly acquitted the accused based on technicalities:
“The evidence of key witnesses, supported by forensic and circumstantial evidence, proves beyond reasonable doubt that the accused were involved in the assassination.”
Credibility of Witnesses
The Court upheld the credibility of witnesses:
“The presence of witnesses at the scene is established. Their testimonies are consistent in identifying the assailants.”
Political Conspiracy
The Court noted that the assassination was part of a long-standing political rivalry in Bihar:
“The murder was not a random act but a calculated execution involving multiple individuals.”
Final Judgment
The Supreme Court ruled:
- Mantu Tiwari (A-4) and Vijay Kumar Shukla @ Munna Shukla (A-8) are convicted under Sections 302, 307, and 34 of IPC.
- They are sentenced to life imprisonment and fined ₹20,000 each.
- Other accused acquitted due to lack of direct evidence.
Key Takeaways from the Judgment
- Judicial Review of High Court Acquittals: The Supreme Court reaffirmed that higher courts can reinstate trial court convictions if errors in reasoning are found.
- Credibility of Eyewitnesses: A witness cannot be disbelieved solely due to minor inconsistencies.
- Political Influence in Criminal Trials: The judgment highlights the role of politics in criminal trials and stresses the need for impartiality.
Impact of the Judgment
- Strengthens Prosecution in Political Murders: The ruling provides clarity on handling politically motivated crimes.
- Restores Faith in Justice System: Reinstating the conviction ensures accountability.
- Future Precedent: The case will serve as a guiding precedent for politically sensitive cases.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s decision in Rama Devi v. State of Bihar is a landmark ruling reinforcing the principles of justice. By restoring the conviction of two accused, the Court has sent a strong message against political assassinations and judicial interference based on technicalities. The ruling will have a lasting impact on similar cases in the future.
Petitioner Name: Rama Devi.Respondent Name: State of Bihar & Others.Judgment By: Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar, Justice R. Mahadevan.Place Of Incident: Patna, Bihar.Judgment Date: 03-10-2024.
Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!
Download Judgment: rama-devi-vs-state-of-bihar-&-oth-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-03-10-2024.pdf
Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment
See all petitions in Murder Cases
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Attempt to Murder Cases
See all petitions in Extortion and Blackmail
See all petitions in Fraud and Forgery
See all petitions in Judgment by Sanjiv Khanna
See all petitions in Judgment by Sanjay Kumar
See all petitions in Judgment by R. Mahadevan
See all petitions in partially allowed
See all petitions in Modified
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments October 2024
See all petitions in 2024 judgments
See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
