Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 296 (JHR)

ANAND MINJ v. STATE OF JHARKHAND

2006-03-29

N.DHINAKAR, R.R.PRASAD

body2006
Judgment : N. DHINAKAR, R. R. PRASAD, J. ( 1 ) THE appellant was arrayed as A-2 alongwith Kishore Ekka and Xavier Ekka, who were arrayed as A-1 and A-3. They were charged and tried for the offence under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal code. The trial Judge, while acquitting Kishore ekka, A-1, and Xavier Ekka, a-3, found the appellant, Anand Minj, alone as guilty and sentenced him to imprisonment for life. He was also found guilty for the offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code for which he was sentenced to imprisonment for six years. This appeal is against the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence. ( 2 ) PW 1, Sukhal Baraik, is the father of the deceased, Jamuna Baraik. The case of the prosecution is that on the evening of Deepawali festival, the deceased left the house and did not return home. PW 1, the father of the deceased searched for his son but could not find him. On 12/11/1986, he gave a written report at the police station and an entry was made in the Station Diary and enquiry was conducted by the police on 14/11/1986. In the meantime, A-3, Xavier ekka, and A-1, Kishore Ekka, informed the villagers that the deceased was shot at by the appellant, Anand Minj, after anand Minj asked them to bring him to a mango tree. ( 3 ) AFTER the said information was given to the police, a crime was registered and investigation was taken up. The body could not be found and only some torn pieces of a Pant and Shirt, which were in a ditch, were seized under the seizure list, attested by the witnesses and final report was filed against all three accused but the appellant alone was found guilty, as stated earlier. ( 4 ) THE appellant, when questioned under Section 313, Cr PC, on the incriminating circumstances appearing against him, denied all the circumstances. ( 5 ) THE learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that in the absence of any legal evidence, the trial judge was not justified in convicting the appellant. ( 4 ) THE appellant, when questioned under Section 313, Cr PC, on the incriminating circumstances appearing against him, denied all the circumstances. ( 5 ) THE learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that in the absence of any legal evidence, the trial judge was not justified in convicting the appellant. It is the contention of the counsel that the statement of A-1 and A-3, alleged to have been made to the villagers, cannot be put against the appellant as it is only a statement of the co-accused and in any event in the absence of any material, the trial Court was not justified in relying upon the exculpatory statement of the two accused, who were acquitted, to find the appellant guilty. ( 6 ) ON the above contention, we have heard Mrs. Banani Verma, learned app, appearing for the State. ( 7 ) WE find some substance in the argument. Though, the prosecution came out with a version that the deceased left the house before Deepawali and he did not return home and that he was murdered by the appellant, it could not succeed in establishing all the links in the chain of circumstances. The evidence of PW 1, at best, will show that the deceased left the house before Dipawali and did not return home. There is absolutely no evidence, except the statement of PW 1 that A-1 and A-3, who were acquitted by the trial Court, informed the villagers that the appellant committed the murder. We cannot uphold the conviction of the appellant on the basis of the exculpatory statement of the two other accused. In fact, even the said evidence that the accused 1 and 3 made a statement and took the police party, where the occurrence had taken place, with a view to show the body is also not supported, since even according to the prosecution when the villagers went to the place, they did not find any body. On the contrary, they pnly found some torn pieces of Pant and shirt and that from this alone this Court cannot infer that the deceased was murdered at the spot by the 2nd accused, appellant. ( 8 ) IN the absence of any legal evidence connecting the accused- appellant with the crime, we cannot but acquit the appellant and accordingly he is acquitted. ( 8 ) IN the absence of any legal evidence connecting the accused- appellant with the crime, we cannot but acquit the appellant and accordingly he is acquitted. ( 9 ) THE appeal is allowed and the order of conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant is set aside. It is reported that the appellant is on bail he is discharged from the liabilities of bail bonds. Appeal allowed. --- *** --- .