| ASPECTS | DETAILS |
| Case Title | Rama Devi vs. The State of Bihar and Others |
| Introduction | This case states the appeals related to the murder of Brij Bihari Prasad, a member of the Bihar Legislative Assembly, and his bodyguard, Lakshmeshwar Sahu, on 13th June 1998. The Supreme Court’s decision addresses the acquittal of several accused by the Patna High Court and confirms the conviction of some others. |
| Factual Background | On 13th June 1998, while in judicial custody at Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Science (IGIMS), Patna, Brij Bihari Prasad, and his bodyguard were shot dead by a group of assailants who arrived in two vehicles. The case involves multiple eyewitnesses, including politicians, and focuses on the conspiracy and execution of the murders. The trial court had convicted nine individuals. |
| Legal Issues |
|
| Applicable Law |
|
| Analysis | The Supreme Court scrutinized the testimonies of key witnesses, including Paras Nath Chaudhury and Mahanth Ashwani Das, and found that the evidence supported the conviction of two accused. The court also examined the issues raised regarding the delay in FIR registration and the failure to recover weapons, but held that these did not undermine the prosecution’s case. |
| Conclusion | The court upheld the convictions of Mantu Tiwari (A-4) and Vijay Kumar Shukla (A-8) for murder and attempted murder. It affirmed their life sentences. The court, however, acquitted several other accused due to a lack of direct evidence implicating them in the conspiracy. |
| Current Scenario | The decision reinforces the role of evidence and witness testimony in criminal cases involving conspiracy. The court emphasized the credibility of eyewitnesses, even in the absence of certain procedural formalities. |
CASE SUMMARY – In this case, the murder of Bihar MLA Brij Bihari Prasad and his bodyguard was done in 1998. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Mantu Tiwari and Vijay Kumar Shukla for their roles in the murders while acquitting others due to insufficient evidence of conspiracy. The case focused on the reliability of eyewitness testimony, delay in FIR registration, and failure to recover the murder weapon. The court restored the life sentences of the convicted individuals but did not find sufficient grounds to reverse the acquittals of other accused individuals involved in the alleged conspiracy.
“The credibility of witness testimony stands as the cornerstone of justice, even amidst procedural delays and missing evidence.”– SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SOURCE – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
