Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 662 (JHR)

Sahdeo Oraon v. State of Bihar (now Jharkhand)

2004-06-30

LAKSHMAN URAON, SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA

body2004
JUDGMENT: S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.-By the impugned judgment and order dated 14th January, 2000 passed by learned 5th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Sessions Trial no. 257 of 1997, the appellants have been convicted u/s. 302/34 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. 2. The case of the prosecution, as per informant, Jagni Orain (P.W.3) is that the occurrence took place on 29th June, 1996. On the said date at about 6 P.M. her husband, Ram Oraon (deceased) had gone to bring rice from rice mill in his by-cycle along with his son, Lakhwa Oraon (P.W.4) and Bachan Oraon (P.W.5). She was waiting for her husband near a Kaathal (jack fruit) tree in front of her house. At about 7 P.M., she heard alarm raised by her husband (deceased) and rushed towards the road. On the way, she met her son, Lakhwa Oraon, who told her that the accused, Etwa Oraon and Somre Oraon were assaulting his father, Ram Oraon by tangl (axe). She saw her husband lying on the ground and bleeding from his neck. The accused were fleeing with tang; in their hands. She further stated that she saw the accused giving blows on the head of her husband and slitting his neck. They also chased her and her sons. Her husband succumbed to the injuries at the spot. The reason for occurrence was stated to be enmity as the accused were in litigating terms with her husband. Earlier also the accused assaulted her husband but he escaped at that time. The prosecution case rests on the testimony of two eye witnesses, namely, P.W. 3, Jagni Orain (informant), widow of the deceased and P.W. 4, Lakhwa Oraon, a minor son of the deceased. Apart from them, six other witnesses were examined out of whom, PW-1, Mangra Oraon, PW-2, Birsa Oraon and PW-7, Khade Oraon were declared hostile by the prosecution but PW-1, Mangra Oraon and PW-2, Birsa Oraon proved their signatures put on the inquest report. Bachan Oraon (P.W.5), a minor 5 year old son of informant being not found fit for deposition, his evidence was not taken by the Court. Rest two witnesses were PW-6, Abdul Majid, the I.O. and PW-8, Dr. Ajit Kr. Choudhary, Medical Officer, who did autopsy on the body of the deceased. 3. Bachan Oraon (P.W.5), a minor 5 year old son of informant being not found fit for deposition, his evidence was not taken by the Court. Rest two witnesses were PW-6, Abdul Majid, the I.O. and PW-8, Dr. Ajit Kr. Choudhary, Medical Officer, who did autopsy on the body of the deceased. 3. Counsel for the appellants submitted that P.W.4, Lakhwa Oraon being minor son of the deceased, his testimony is unreliable. The testimony of other witness, namely, P.W. 3, Jagni Orain (informant) cannot be relied, she being interested witness. 4. P.W. 3, Jagni Orain and P'W4, Lakhwa Oraon being eye witnesses, it is desirable to notice their deposition as well as other relevant evidence. According to informant (P.W.3), incidence took place about 11/2 year back on a Saturday evening. She was sitting below a jack fruit (kathal) tree and waiting for her husband. When her husband, Ram Oraon was coming on a by-cycle along with his son, Lakhwa Oraon (P.W.4) after husking rice and mahua from the rice mill and reached the main road, her husband raised alarm. On hearing alarm, she rushed towards the place of occurrence. On the way, she met her son, Lakhwa Oraon (P.W.4), who told that the accused, Sahdeo Oraon, Somre Oraon and Etwa Oraon were assaulting his father by tangi. She went and saw that the accused were assaulting her husband by tangi. The accused, Sahdeo Oraon was fleeing away after slitting his neck; he died on the spot. 5. In the cross-examination, the informant (PW-3) narrated the place of occurrence and stated that there were no villagers at the spot. She had seen the accused, Sahdeo Oraon fleeing away with a dagger after slitting his neck. The dagger is generally used for slitting goat. She saw the accused, Somre Oraon and Etwa Orain having tangi in their hands, assaulting her husband by tangi. When she raised alarm, Mangra Oraon (PW-1), Birsa Oraon (PW-2) and others reached the spot. The other witness (PW-4) Lakhwa Oraon, though he was minor child of about 6 years but was found fit by the court to depose properly. In his deposition, he stated that the accused killed his father. Sahdeo Oraon and Etwa Oraon had dagger in their hands and Somre Oraon had tangi. He identified the accused in the court. The other witness (PW-4) Lakhwa Oraon, though he was minor child of about 6 years but was found fit by the court to depose properly. In his deposition, he stated that the accused killed his father. Sahdeo Oraon and Etwa Oraon had dagger in their hands and Somre Oraon had tangi. He identified the accused in the court. He further stated that he had gone• along with his father and while they were coming, the accused killed his father. Except for minor contradiction, the defence could not make out any case after long cross-examination. The testimony of P.W.3, informant, is wholly reliable is consistent with medical evidence. P.W.8, Dr. Ajit Kumar Chaudhary, who conducted post mortem on the body of the deceased, found injuries and gave the following opinion : Abrasions (i) 2 x 1 cm over left eye at its lateral side. (ii) 2 cm x 1 cm & 2 x 1/2 cm over back of left elbow. (iii) 1 x 1/2 cm over front of right leg. Lacerated wounds (i) 5 x 2 cm x bone deep and 3 x 2 cm bone deep over left side of forehead with depressed and comminuted fracture of left frontal bone measuring 9 x 5 cm over lacerations frontal lobe of brain. There was process of subdual blood and blood-clot over left hemisphere brain. There was a crack fracture over left temporal bone measuring 6 cm long. Incised wound (i) 8 x 2 cm x soft tissues over right lateral neck. (ii) 5 x 2 cm x scalp deep over left side of parietal region of head. (iii) 2 x 1 cm x soft tissue on left side of neck with tailing 9 cm long cutting the soft tissue and blood vessels underneath. (iv) 5 x 2 cm x bone deep over front of neck upper part cutting the soft tissues, trachea, esophagus, blood-vessels and four cervical vertebrae including spinal cord. Internal organs were pale. Opinion (i) All the injuries are ante mortem. (ii) Abrasions and lacerated wound were caused by hard and blunt substance and incised wounds by heavy sharp cutting weapon. (iii) Death was due to above noted injuries. (iv) Time elapsed since death was between 12 to 36 hours from time of P.M. examination. Those abrasions and lacerated wounds may be caused by the butt portion of Tangi. (ii) Abrasions and lacerated wound were caused by hard and blunt substance and incised wounds by heavy sharp cutting weapon. (iii) Death was due to above noted injuries. (iv) Time elapsed since death was between 12 to 36 hours from time of P.M. examination. Those abrasions and lacerated wounds may be caused by the butt portion of Tangi. Those incised wounds may be caused by the sharp edge of tangi. The I.O., P.W. 6, Abdul Majid stated that he seized the blood stained soil, blood stained tangi and dagger from the house of the accused, Etwa Oraon and Sahdeo Oraon which were marked as Exhibit-5 and 5/1 respectively. The testimony of the eye witnesses, as stated above, are consistent with medical evidence. Their conduct is also natural. The defence could not point out any major contradiction in their evidence to hold their evidence untrustworthy and unreliable. In the case of 'Sadhu Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan', reported in 2003 (2) East Cr. C. 183 (S.C.), the Supreme Court held that even conviction of an accused can be based solely on the testimony of a solitary witness. However, in such a case the Court is only required to satisfy that implicit reliance can be placed on the testimony of such a witness and that the testimony is so free of blemish that it can be acted upon without insisting upon corroboration. The testimony of the witness must be one, which inspires confidence and leaves no doubt in the mind of the Court about the truthfulness of the witness. 6. In the present case, as stated above, the testimony of P.W.3, informant cannot be doubted nor can be stated to be untrustworthy which is consistent with the medical evidence. The seizure of blood stained tangi and dagger from the house of the accused also inspire confidence on the testimony of P.W. 3 and 4. 7. In the aforesaid background, no case having been made out to set aside the judgment of the trial court and there being no merit, this criminal appeal is fit to be and is dismissed. Lakshman Uraon, J.-I agree.