Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 367 (JHR)

Bhagta Munda v. State Of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)

2007-04-26

AMARESHWAR SAHAY, DHANANJAY PRASAD SINGH

body2007
JUDGMENT 1. Sole appellant Bhagta Munda stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for life, by the 9th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 658 of 1989. 2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that in the afternoon of 25.8.1989, informant Dharma Munda and his brother Turiya Munda have gone out of their house to work in the fields leaving behind deceased Suilo Mundain and sister Dubhan Mundain in the house situated at Mauza Man, Police StationLapung, DistrictRanchi. As further that at about 10.00 a.m., the informant was informed by his brother Turiya Munda that the appellant has killed their mother. PW 1 and PW 2, both brothers, arrived at the house to find that Suilo Mundian was lying dead with injuries on her head. According to informant, PW 3 Dubhan Mundian narrated to them the incident wherein the appellant has came at about 8.30 a.m. to their house while she was baking bread. She further stated that the appellant asked the deceased about the money kept by her sons, on which she did not reply. Thereafter, he went out and came back with "basula", a heavy sharp cutting weapon used by Carpenter to assault the deceased repeatedly on her head, resulting in her death. The informant further alleged that the appellant used to call the deceased "Dian". The matter was reported to villagers and ultimately police, which arrived at the place of occurrence in the afternoon to record the statement of PW 1 Dharma Munda and registered Lapung Police Station Case No. 23 of 1989 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant. The police prepared the inquest report, seized the weapon of assault and bloodstained soil from the place of occurrence in presence of witnesses and sent the dead body for its post-mortem examination. The police finally submitted charge-sheet against the appellant, who was put on trial after framing of charge against him by the Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi on 15.3.1990. The appellant pleaded false implication and not guilty. However, after examining the witnesses, the trial Court found and held the appellant guilty under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to v serve rigorous imprisonment for life. 4. The present appeal has been preferred mainly on the grounds that there was no eye-witness, except PW 3. The appellant pleaded false implication and not guilty. However, after examining the witnesses, the trial Court found and held the appellant guilty under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to v serve rigorous imprisonment for life. 4. The present appeal has been preferred mainly on the grounds that there was no eye-witness, except PW 3. The memo of appeal further mentions that the informant was hearsay witness of the occurrence and the trial Court having put reliance on the interested witnesses have committed a mistake. It was also asserted that the husband of the deceased PW 5 and villagers, PW 6 and PW 7 having been declared hostile, the trial Court should have discarded the evidence of PW 1, PW 2, and PW 3. According to this memo of appeal, non-examination of the investigating officer creates a reasonable doubt on the prosecution version. The counsel on record, Mr. B.P. Teterbe, did not appear to argue the appeal. Thereafter, we appointed Mr. P.A.S. Pati, Advocate as Amicus Curiae to assist this Court on behalf of the appellant. 5. Mr. Pati, learned Amicus Curiae has assisted this Court able and tried to point out the lacunae in the prosecution version. According to learned Amicus Curiae, the only eye-witness of the occurrence did not support the injuries found on the deceased in the post-mortem report conducted by Dr. Saroj Kumar (PW 4) vide Ext. 1. It was also submitted that the statement of PW 3 should have been taken with more caution keeping in view of the fact that half of the witnesses have turned hostile and the defence got prejudiced in absence of the investigating officer. 6. We have anxiously considered the submissions made on behalf of the appellant along with the materials on record, undisputedly, Suilo Mundain was found dead in her house in the forenoon of 25.8.1989. The informant and his brother Turiya Munda came to their house on getting information that Suilo Mundaian was assaulted, resulting in her death by appellant, who is admittedly their cousin brothers. It has also come on record that the deceased was called Dian by this appellant. So far as manner of occurrence and presence of witness PW 3 during this occurrence are concerned, there is no contradiction in the evidence of PW 3. She is sister of the informant and daughter of the deceased. It has also come on record that the deceased was called Dian by this appellant. So far as manner of occurrence and presence of witness PW 3 during this occurrence are concerned, there is no contradiction in the evidence of PW 3. She is sister of the informant and daughter of the deceased. According to her, when she was baking bread, appellant came there and inquired from the deceased whereabouts of money kept by PW 1 and PW 2 and when she did not respond, he went back to bring "basula" with which he struck the deceased repeatedly on her head. The injuries found by PW 4 vide Ext. 1 shows that the deceased has got four injuries on her head and face. Admittedly, "basula" is a heavy weapon used by carpenter to cut woods. When we carefully gone through the postmortem report, it is found that fracture of parietal bones and cheek prominence was prominent and death occurred due to above noted head injuries. The evidence of PW 3 is consistent on this aspect that the appellant has assaulted the deceased with "basula" and the said "basula" has been recovered from the place of occurrence by the investigating officer vide Ext. 2, the seizure list, proved by formal witness PW 8. 7. We further find that the witnesses are truthful because they did not claim to be eye-witness of the occurrence nor they exaggerated in their statements. PW 5, PW 6 and PW 7 are hearsay witnesses of the occurrence. The husband of the deceased PW 5 Shiv Munda has not asserted specifically that he has seen the facts. All these facts and circumstances go to prove that the witnesses are truthful. It has also come on record that the informant has got no grudge against the appellant who used to call the deceased dian. Therefore, the suggestion that the appellant might have been implicated falsely in this case appears to be afterthought. The learned Amicus Curiae at this stage pointed out that the deceased has got no food insider her stomach as per report of PW 4. In this context, it may be relevant to mention that PW 3 stated that she was baking bread and the time of alleged occurrence is at about 8.30 a.m. Normally, a female in villages do not take food by this time. Therefore, the deceased found with empty stomach was normal. 8. In this context, it may be relevant to mention that PW 3 stated that she was baking bread and the time of alleged occurrence is at about 8.30 a.m. Normally, a female in villages do not take food by this time. Therefore, the deceased found with empty stomach was normal. 8. In the facts and circumstances mentioned above, we find that the persecution witnesses have proved the prosecution case beyond reasonable doubt. The learned trial Court has discussed all these facts and circumstances in the impugned judgment vide paragraphs 7, 8, 11 and 14. We do not find any material on record to disagree with the view taken by the learned trial Court Accordingly, we find that the present appeal has got no merit and deserves to be dismissed. 9. In the result this appeal is dismissed and the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court against the appellant are hereby confirmed.