Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 131 (JHR)

Udai Baskey v. State of Bihar (now Jharkhand)

2006-02-20

M.Y.EQBAL, N.DHINAKAR

body2006
By Court.- The appellants 1 to 3, Udai Baskey, Mahantha Baskey and Moti Lal Hembaran were arrayed as A-1, A-3 and A-2 respectively before the Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka. They were tried alongwith 9 others for various offences including Sections 302 and 323 IPC. While the trial Judge acquitted the other 9 accused, it found the appellants alone guilty and sentenced appellant Udai Baskey (A-1) to imprisonment for life under Section 302 IPC, appellant Mahantha Baskey (A-3) to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 IPC as well as R.I. for three months, under Section 323 IPC, whereas appellant Moti Lal Hembaran (A-2) was sentenced to suffer R.I. for three months under section 323 IPC. However, both the sentences of appellant Mahantha Baskey (A-3) were ordered to run concurrently. The present appeal is against the said conviction and sentence. 2. The facts necessary to dispose of this appeal are as follows: PW 3 Sakal Murmu is the son of the deceased Khande Marandi and PW 1 Churki Murmu is the daughter of the deceased and sister of PW 3. The appellants and the deceased were residents of village Saraidaha. According to the prosecution, there was land dispute pending between the appellants and the deceased. This is said to be the motive for the occurrence which took place at 10.00 a.m. on 6.8.1980. On 6th August, 1980, at 10.00 a.m. Sakal Murmu (PW 3) alongwith his mother Khande Marandi, the deceased in this case, and sister Churki Murmu (PW 1) were in the field taking out the paddy seedlings. Alongwith them PW 7 Munshi Marandi, PW 9 Biti Hemram and PW10 Tusi Hembram were also present there. The Appellants went there and appellant No.1 Udai Baskey, appellant No.2 Mahantha Baskey and appellant No. 3 Motil lal Hembaran, each was having lathis in their hands. Appellants 1 and 2 started beating the deceased Khande Marandi with lathi. PW 1 Churki Murmu intervened and she was also assaulted by appellant No.3 Moti lal Hembaran. Thereafter, all the appellants went away from the place. PW 3 Sakal Murmu accompanied by his sister Churki Murmu (PW 1) leaving the scene of occurrence, proceeded to Sikaripara Police Station and gave fardbeyan (Ext. 4). As PW 1 Churki Murmu had injuries on her person, she was referred to the hospital for treatment. 3. Thereafter, all the appellants went away from the place. PW 3 Sakal Murmu accompanied by his sister Churki Murmu (PW 1) leaving the scene of occurrence, proceeded to Sikaripara Police Station and gave fardbeyan (Ext. 4). As PW 1 Churki Murmu had injuries on her person, she was referred to the hospital for treatment. 3. On being referred, PW 8, the Medical Officer attached to the hospital, examined PW 1 Churki Murmu at about 4.30 pm and he found two lacerations on the head and one bruise on her back. He issued Ext. 2, the wound certificate for the injuries found on Churki Murmu (PW 1). 4. In the meantime, investigation was taken up and the Investigating Officer proceeded to the scene of occurrence and conducted inquest. He prepared the Seizure-list (Ext. 5) and later sent the dead body of Khande Marandi to the hospital for post mortem. 5. On receipt of the dead body and the requisition from the Police Officer, PW 13 Dr. Nawal Kishore Prasad conducted autopsy on the dead body of Khande Marandi and he found the following injuries:- (i) Swelling 4" x 1" over right parietal region. On dissection depressed fracture of right parietal bone was present and a big haemotoma was present underneath of fractured area. Brain and menenges were lacerated. (ii) Incised wound 6" x 11/2' x bone deep over left side of neck upto trachea. Whole trachea was cut. (iii) Incised would 1" x 1/2 x 1/4" over pre-auricular region. (iv) Abrasion 2" x 1/4" over the back of both forearms. The doctor issued (Ext. 3), post mortem certificate with his opinion that injury Nos. (i) and (ii) are sufficient either independently or cumulatively, in the ordinary course of nature, to cause the death. 6. In the meantime, investigation proceeded during which the witnesses were examined and the statements were recorded. After completion of the investigation, the final report was filed against the appellants. 7. When the appellants were questioned under Section 313 CrPC on the incriminating circumstances appearing against them, they denied all the incriminating circumstances. No witness was examined on their side. 8. Mr. Rajan Raj, who has been appointed as Amicus Curiae by this Court, contends that the trial court having acquitted the other 9 accused, was not justified in finding the appellants alone guilty. No witness was examined on their side. 8. Mr. Rajan Raj, who has been appointed as Amicus Curiae by this Court, contends that the trial court having acquitted the other 9 accused, was not justified in finding the appellants alone guilty. He further submits that since two witnesses have stated that two of the appellants were also armed with Hasua, the prosecution case is to be disbelieved. 9. We have heard Mr. M.A. Khan, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State. 10. The cause of death of the deceased Khande Marandi stands established through the evidence of the doctor (PW 13) the post mortem certificate (Ext. 3) issued by him. According to the doctor, injury Nos. (i) and (ii) either both or one of them were/was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death of the deceased. The appellants did not dispute the fact before the trial Court that Khande Marandi died on account of homicidal violence. We, on the medical evidence, hold that Khande Marandi died on account of homicidal violence. 11. The prosecution, in order to establish that the appellants 1 and 2 inflicted injuries on the deceased Khande Marandi and that during the course of the same transaction appellant No. 3 also inflicted injuries on PW 1 Churki Murmu, examined five witnesses who are PWs. 1, 3, 4, 5 and 9. It could be seen from the evidence of these witnesses that on the date of incident, when the deceased and other witnesses were at the field taking out the paddy seedlings, the appellants went there armed with lathis and thereafter appellants 1 and 2 started beating the deceased with lathi and that when PW 1 intervened, she was also beaten by appellant No. 3 as a result of which she also suffered injuries for which she was treated by the doctor (PW 8). The prosecution also marked injury report Ext. 2. 12. On going through the evidence, we find no reason for us to hold that the evidence of PWs 1, 3, 4, 5 and 9 cannot be accepted. It is no doubt true, as contended by the learned counsel, that PWs. 3 and 5 have also mentioned that two of the appellants were armed with Hasua but that by itself will not be a reason for this Court to reject the evidence of the eyewitnesses. It is no doubt true, as contended by the learned counsel, that PWs. 3 and 5 have also mentioned that two of the appellants were armed with Hasua but that by itself will not be a reason for this Court to reject the evidence of the eyewitnesses. It is to be remembered that PW 1 suffered injuries during the course of the same transaction and after the fardbeyan (Ext. 4) was given, she was referred to the hospital and was treated by the doctor (PW 8) at 4.30 pm. The injuries found on PW 1 show that she was very much at the scene of occurrence and that when the complaint was given by PW 3 Sakal Murmu she was also present at the police station, or otherwise she (PW 1) could not have been sent from the police station to the hospital for her treatment within one hour of giving the fardbeyan (Ext. 4). We do not find any reason to reject the evidence of these witnesses. 13. The other contention of the learned counsel for the appellants that since tile trial Court has acquitted the other accused, the appellants are also entitled for the same benefit and they ought to have been acquitted, is only to be noted and rejected. The trial Court rightly acquitted the other 9 accused since there was no evidence on record to show that they shared the common object of each other in causing the death of Khande Marandi. On the contrary, the evidence is to the effect that the other accused who were acquitted, were nowhere near the scene of occurrence and that they were at the field, far away from the place of occurrence. In the above background, the trial court came to the conclusion that there was no common object of all the accused and, therefore, it acquitted the other 9 accused. 14. On going through the evidence on record, we do not see any reason to find the appellants not guilty merely because the other 9 accused were acquitted on the facts and circumstances of this case. We, therefore, accept the prosecution version and confirm the conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellants. This appeal is dismissed. The appellants are on bail. On going through the evidence on record, we do not see any reason to find the appellants not guilty merely because the other 9 accused were acquitted on the facts and circumstances of this case. We, therefore, accept the prosecution version and confirm the conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellants. This appeal is dismissed. The appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds are cancelled and they are directed to surrender before the Court below for serving out the remaining part of the sentence, otherwise the Court below shall take all steps to commit them to jail.