Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 712 (JHR)

Junas Kiro v. State of Jharkhand

2015-06-23

PRAMATH PATNAIK, R.R.PRASAD

body2015
JUDGMENT : This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 3.12.2002 and the order of sentence dated 4.12.2002 passed by the then Sessions Judge, Simdega in S.T.No.123 of 2001 whereby and whereunder the court having found the appellant guilty for committing murder of his wife Agnesia Kiro convicted him for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. 2. The case of the prosecution as has been made out in the Fardbeyan (Ext.3) is that while the informant Nuwas Kindo (P.W.6) was sleeping in his house along with his wife Juleta Kindo (P.W.2) on 1.9.2001, he at about 3-4 a.m. heard distress sound of the deceased coming from the room adjacent to his house. On hearing it, when he along with his wife Juleta Kindo went there, they found the door closed but they heard the sound of beating. They tried to open the door. But when did not succeed to get it opened, they informed to the witnesses, Amus Kindo, P.W.3, Bhinsent Kindo, P.W.4, Anthres Kindo, P.W.5, who came over there and found Agnesia Kindo, wife of the appellant lying dead under the pool of blood. There they also found tangi having blood mark over it. At about 1.30 p.m. when Sikandar Prasad Singh, P.W.11 posted as Sub-Inspector in Bolwa Police Station received information regarding deceased being killed, he entered such information in the station diary and proceeded to the place of occurrence. On coming to the place of occurrence, Sikandar Prasad Singh, P.W.11 recorded the fardbeyan (Ext.3) of Nuwas Kindo, P.W.6. 3. On the basis of which, a formal F.I.R was drawn and P.W.11 took up the investigation. During which, he made inquest on the dead body of the deceased and prepared inquest report (Ext.4). Thereupon the dead body was sent for post mortem examination, which was conducted by Dr.Jitender Nath Singh, P.W.12. He on holding autopsy did find following injuries. (i) A lacerated wound size 8” x 5” x intracranial cavity and right maxilla on right side of face and head on the side of right eye. Fracture of bones and brain visible. (ii) A lacerated wound size 5” x 4” x intracranial cavity situated behind right ear. (iii) A lacerated wound size 2” x 1” x 1” on lower jaw on right side, underlying fractured bone visible. Fracture of bones and brain visible. (ii) A lacerated wound size 5” x 4” x intracranial cavity situated behind right ear. (iii) A lacerated wound size 2” x 1” x 1” on lower jaw on right side, underlying fractured bone visible. (iv) A lacerated wound size 7” x 5” x maxillary autrum (left) and oral cavity lacerating left cheek and upper lip on left side of face. (v) A lacerated wound size 4 cm. x 3 cm. x intracranial cavity of left side of forehead. Fractured skull bone and brain visible. 4. Doctor issued post mortem examination report with an opinion that death was caused due to cardio respiratory arrest caused by extensive brain injury and haemorrhagic shock. 5. Meanwhile, the Investigating Officer, P.W.11 seized tangi having blood mark over it and also earth smeared with blood under seizure list (Ext.2). He also recorded the statements of the witnesses. 6. After completion of investigation, when the charge sheet was submitted, cognizance of the offence was taken against the appellant. Subsequently, when the case was committed to the court of sessions, the appellant was put on trial. 7. During trial, the prosecution examined altogether 12 witnesses. Of them, P.W.1, Pramod Kumar Kullu, P.W.3, Amus Kindo, P.W.4, Bhimsent Kindo, P.W.6, Nuwas Kindo and P.W.7, Kaliyment Surin and also P.W.9, Sthephen Kindo did testify that on coming to know about the occurrence when they went to the house of the appellant, they found the deceased lying dead under pool of blood. There they also did find a tangi having blood mark over it in the corner of the room. On being asked, the appellant confessed before them that it was he, who has killed his wife. P.W.2, Julena Kindo, wife of the informant, Nuwas Kindo, P.W.6 have also testified that when on hearing distress sound being raised by the deceased coming from her house when they came over there, they found the door closed. When it was opened, they found the deceased dead and there in that room, the appellant was also present. The other witnesses, Anthres Kindo, P.W.5, Adhiram Kindo, P.W.8 and Dezar Baraik, P.W.10 have tendered for cross-examination. 8. When it was opened, they found the deceased dead and there in that room, the appellant was also present. The other witnesses, Anthres Kindo, P.W.5, Adhiram Kindo, P.W.8 and Dezar Baraik, P.W.10 have tendered for cross-examination. 8. Upon closure of the prosecution case when the appellant was questioned under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as to whether he before the witnesses had confessed that he had killed his wife, he answered in positive, meaning thereby that he confessed his guilt. 9. Thereafter the court having placed its implicit reliance over the testimonies of witnesses and also over the factum of appellant confessing his guilt, found the appellant guilty. Accordingly, recorded the order of conviction and sentence which is under challenge. 10. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that Nuwas Kindo, P.W.6, the informant has testified that when he came to the house of the appellant, he did see the appellant assaulting the deceased but that piece of evidence is not worth reliable as he had never made any statement in his fardbeyan that he had seen the appellant assaulting the deceased and that witnesses are also not consistent on the point as to whether the door was opened by the appellant voluntarily or the door was opened by force. 11. As against this, Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the circumstances are there which indicate towards the guilt of the appellant and that apart, the appellant not only confessed his guilt before the witnesses P.W.1, P.W.3, P.W.4, P.W.6 and P.W.7 but has also admitted his guilt in his statement made under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and thereby the court below has rightly convicted the appellant for committing murder of his wife. 12. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the record, it does appear that it is the case of the prosecution as has been testified by Nuwas Kindo, P.W.6 that while he was sleeping in his house along with his wife, Julena Kindo,P.W.2, they in early morning on 1.9.2001 heard distress sound of the deceased coming from the adjacent house. On hearing when the informant, P.W.6 along with his wife, P.W.2 came over there, they found the door closed. When it was pushed forcibly, it got opened and found the appellant assaulting the deceased. On hearing when the informant, P.W.6 along with his wife, P.W.2 came over there, they found the door closed. When it was pushed forcibly, it got opened and found the appellant assaulting the deceased. Thereafter they came out of the room and then informed to their neighbours Amus Kindo, P.W.3, Bhimsent Kindo, P.W.4 and Anthres Kindo, P.W.5, who along with other villagers came over there before whom the appellant confessed his guilt. He has further testified that from the room a tangi which was having blood mark over it was seized. 13. So far as testimony of this witness to the effect that he saw the appellant assaulting the deceased is concerned, that does not appear to be reliable, keeping in view the statement made by him in the fardbeyan wherein he has never stated that he had seen the appellant assaulting the deceased. However, that part of the testimony whereby he has testified that when the witnesses P.W.3, P.W.4, P.W.5 and also others came, the appellant confessed his guilt before them and that tangi was recovered, not only remains intact but also find corroboration from the testimonies of P.W.1, P.W.3, P.W.4, P.W.7 and P.W.9, who have testified that when they after knowing the occurrence came to the house of the appellant, they found the deceased lying dead under pool of blood and there in the room, a tangi having blood mark over it was there which according to P.W.1 and P.W.7 was seized by the police. Further the appellant confessed before them that it was he, who had killed his wife. 14. Thus, the following circumstances appear to be there (i) distress alarm on being raised by the deceased, the informant came and found the appellant present in the room in which deceased was done to death. (ii) a tangi having blood mark was also found in the room (iii) in the room only the deceased and the appellant were there (iv) the appellant confessed before the witnesses that he has killed the deceased. 15. All those circumstances unerringly points towards the guilt of the appellant. 16. Under the circumstances, there could be none other than the appellant who committed murder of the deceased. That apart, the appellant has also accepted his guilt in his statement made under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 17. 15. All those circumstances unerringly points towards the guilt of the appellant. 16. Under the circumstances, there could be none other than the appellant who committed murder of the deceased. That apart, the appellant has also accepted his guilt in his statement made under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 17. Under the circumstances, there does not appear to be a slightest doubt that it was the appellant who committed murder of the deceased. 18. Thus, we do find that the trial court was absolutely justified in recording the judgment of conviction and order of sentence which is hereby affirmed. 19. Thus, this appeal stands dismissed.