Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 53 (JHR)

Sugia Mahtain v. State of Jharkhand

2011-01-27

R.R.PRASAD, SUSHIL HARKAULI

body2011
JUDGMENT By Court.--Out of three appellants, the appellant Sugia Mahtain has died on 2.1.2005 and as such, this appeal as against her stands abated. 2. So far the appellant Subhas Mahto is concerned, he, on being convicted alongwith other accused persons has preferred this appeal. During pendency of this appeal a plea was taken that the appellant Subhas Mahto was juvenile on the date of occurrence. Such plea on being raised, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro was directed to enquire into the matter relating to the age of the appellant and to submit report. On holding enquiry, a report was submitted which when was placed before this Court, an order was passed for posting the appeal for hearing so that the said report be considered at that time. 3. By the impugned judgment and order, the appellants, Sudhir Mahto, Subhas Mahto and Sugia Mahtain (since died) on being found guilty for committing murder of Alti Devi were convicted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Further on account of being convicted under Sections 498A and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, they were sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years for each of the offences. 4. The case of the prosecution is that the marriage of Alti Devi had been solemnized with Sudhir Mahto during summer in the year 1995. Since then, she was living in her in-laws' place at Village Santhaldih. On 5.10.1985 in the early morning at about 4 a.m. one Misrilal Mahto (P.W. 1) when met with the appellant, Sudhir Mahto he told him that his wife Alti Devi had gone out of the house to ease herself but has not returned home. Both of them searched out Alti Devi but they did not get any trace of her. Thereafter Misrilal Mahto, P.W. 1 came to the ViIlage-Kasmar and informed to Dhirendra Nath Mahto, the informant (P.W. 4) about the missing of Alti Devi from her in-laws' place. Thereupon, Dhirendra Nath Mahto, the informant (P.W. 4) alongwith Chatradhari Mahto (P.W.3) and Chandrashekhar Mahto (P.W.5) came to the Village-Santhaldih, in-laws' place of Alti Devi. Thereafter Misrilal Mahto, P.W. 1 came to the ViIlage-Kasmar and informed to Dhirendra Nath Mahto, the informant (P.W. 4) about the missing of Alti Devi from her in-laws' place. Thereupon, Dhirendra Nath Mahto, the informant (P.W. 4) alongwith Chatradhari Mahto (P.W.3) and Chandrashekhar Mahto (P.W.5) came to the Village-Santhaldih, in-laws' place of Alti Devi. There the informant (P.W. 4) when asked from mother-in-law of Alti Devi about the whereabouts of Alti Devi, she told that she had gone out of the house to ease herself in the night but did not return home. Thereafter the informant and other witnesses searched her but when they failed in getting any trace of her, Dhirendra Nath Mahto (P.W. 4) submitted a written report before the Officer-in-Charge. Pindrojora Police Station at about 9 p.m. on 5.10.1985 alleging therein that the husband Sudhir Mahto, mother-in-law, Sugia Mahtain and brother-in-law, Subhas Mahto and also other accused persons have committed murder of Alti Devi who was being subjected to cruelty on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. 5. Upon the said written report, a case was registered. The next day, i.e. 6.10.1985 at about 11 a.m. when it was detected that a dead body was lying in a well, it was recovered by the police and was identified to be a dead body of Alti Devi. Inquest was made on the dead body. Thereafter it was sent for post mortem examination which was conducted by Dr. Dhrub Kumar Dhiraj (P.W. 6) who on examination found the following injuries: 1. Abrasion 1/10" x 1/10" placed one inch above right nipple. 2. Abrasion 1/2" x 1/9" over right eye brow. 3. Abrasion's four in number over middle and left forearm in front measuring 1/2' x 1/10" and 1/5" x 1/5" (probably caused by Churis (Bangles) in the wrist-two steel. One pola, one shankha and two metallic. 4. Bruise 1/5" x 1/5" over right check. 6. No injury was found over lips, gums and tongue. Neither external injury nor internal injury was found over neck. Even hyoid bone was not found fractured. On such finding, opinion was given that there is no sign of strangulation or suffocation. Probably for that reason, viscera was preserved for its chemical examination but it never seems to have been done. 7. Neither external injury nor internal injury was found over neck. Even hyoid bone was not found fractured. On such finding, opinion was given that there is no sign of strangulation or suffocation. Probably for that reason, viscera was preserved for its chemical examination but it never seems to have been done. 7. Upon submission of the chargesheet and on committal of the case, all the accused persons were put on trial wherein the prosecution examined one Misrilal Mahto as P.W. 1 who on being informed by the appellant Sudhir Mahto about the missing of Alti Devi had informed about it to Dhirendra Nath Mahto (P.W. 4) brother of the deceased and then Dhirendra Nath Mahto (P.W. 4) alongwith Chatradhari Mahto (P.W. 3) and Chandrashekhar Mahto (P.W. 5) came to the place of Alti Devi where they were told about the missing of Alti Devi. 8. The trial court on noticing the fact that undigested rice was there in the stomach suggesting that within less than six hours, she was done to death and also the other evidence that the deceased had left home at 4 a.m. in the morning formed an opinion that the deceased on being murdered was dropped in the well. That apart, the following circumstances appearing in the case were also taken to be incriminating suggesting guilt of the accused person:- 1. Doctor had found ante mortem abrasion on several parts of the body for which no explanation could be given by the accused persons. 2. Before the deceased was done to death, she was being subjected to cruelty on account of non-fulfillment of demand of cash and ornaments. 9. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel appearing for the State. 10. As we have noticed earlier that the trial court on noticing that there was undigested rice in the stomach of the deceased did find the version of accused persons about the deceased leaving home at 4 a.m. for answering call. 9. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel appearing for the State. 10. As we have noticed earlier that the trial court on noticing that there was undigested rice in the stomach of the deceased did find the version of accused persons about the deceased leaving home at 4 a.m. for answering call. of nature as blatant lie and, hence, it was recorded that the deceased on being done to death was thrown in a well, but in fact, according to the case of the prosecution, the accused persons had informed to the witnesses that the deceased had gone out for easing herself in the night which would be evident from the evidence of the informant, P.W. 4 wherein he has testified that after coming to know from Misrilal Mahto, P.W. 1 about the missing of his sister, he came to in-laws' place of his sister alongwith Chandra Shekhar Mahto, P.W.5 where mother-in-law of his sister had disclosed that Alti Devi had gone out of the house for easing herself in the night but strangely Chatradhari Mahto, PW. 3, who claims to have come to the Village Santhaldih alongwith Dhirendra Nath Mahto, P.W. 4 has deposed that the accused persons told them that the deceased has left home early morning at 4 a.m. whereas PW. 5 Chandrashekhar Mahto did testify that villagers informed him that the deceased had left home at 4 a.m. which assertion cannot be accepted in view of the testimony of P.W. 4 testifying clearly that the mother-in-law of his sister had informed him that deceased had gone out in the night. At that point of time when P.W. 4 was informed P.W. 3 and P.W. 5 were with P.W. 4. Moreover, both the witnesses are not consistent on the point as one says that it was accused persons who told them about the time, when deceased left home whereas other says that it were villagers who told about the time. Moreover, Misrilal Mahto, P.W. 1 who was the first person to come across with the accused Sudhir Mahto at 4 a.m. has never stated that the accused persons told him that the deceased had left home at 4 a.m. 11. Moreover, Misrilal Mahto, P.W. 1 who was the first person to come across with the accused Sudhir Mahto at 4 a.m. has never stated that the accused persons told him that the deceased had left home at 4 a.m. 11. Under the circumstances, when it has never been established that the accused persons had informed about the deceased leaving home at 4 a.m. it would be too much to form an opinion of the guilt of the accused persons as undigested rice had been found in the stomach of the deceased. 12. Further we do find that motive which has been assigned by the prosecution is that on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, the accused persons committed murder of the deceased, but the prosecution has failed to establish the factum of the demand of dowry and subjection of the deceased to cruelty on account of non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry. In this regard, we may refer to testimony of P.W. 4, the informant, wherein he has testified that his sister had come to her parents' house at number of occasions but only when she had come on the occasion of Karma Puja, she had disclosed that the accused persons demanded dowry and used to held out threat of dire consequence. Thus, this witness is not specific as to whether something was demanded in cash or kind and moreover, he is also silent on the point of deceased being subjected to cruelty. However, he has testified that when his father took his sister to her in-laws' place after Karma Puja the accused persons put forth demand of money and ornaments but surprisingly, father was not examined to prove this fact by the prosecution. Thus, it is evident that the witness, P.W. 4 is quite silent on the point of deceased being subjected to cruelty on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and that he is also not on the point that there was consistent demand of dowry by the accused persons. In that view of the matter, any evidence given by P.W. 4 regarding demand of dowry and subjection to the deceased to ill-treatment and assault is not worth acceptable. Thus, the prosecution seems to have utterly failed to establish the allegation that the• deceased was being subjected to cruelty on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. 13. In that view of the matter, any evidence given by P.W. 4 regarding demand of dowry and subjection to the deceased to ill-treatment and assault is not worth acceptable. Thus, the prosecution seems to have utterly failed to establish the allegation that the• deceased was being subjected to cruelty on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. 13. The next circumstance regarding injury being found on the person of the deceased alone cannot be sufficient to hold the appellants guilty, particularly when the Doctor did not find any internal or external injury over neck, nor hyoid bone was found fractured on the basis of which opinion of the doctor is that no sign of strangulation or suffocation is there. 14. Under the circumstance, the prosecution can certainly be said to have failed to prove the charge beyond all reasonable doubt and in the facts and circumstances stated above, the appellants, namely, Subhas Mahto and Sudhir Mahto deserve to have benefit of doubt. 15. Accordingly, the order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court against the appellants Subhas Mahto and Sudhir Mahto is hereby set aside. Consequently, they are acquitted of all the charges levelled against them. Accordingly Sudhir Mahto who is in custody is directed to be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. 16. In view of the aforesaid finding, no further step is required to be taken on the report submitted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro. So far appellant Subhas Mahto is concerned, since he has been acquitted, he is discharged from the liabilities of the bail bond.