Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 664 (GAU)

Birsa Munda v. State of Assam

2016-07-21

AJIT SINGH, SUMAN SHYAM

body2016
JUDGMENT : Ajit Singh, J. Appellant Birsa Munda in Sessions Case No.10/2007 by the impugned judgment dated 26.2.2014 has been held guilty of committing the murder of his father Gangu Munda. He has therefore been convicted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.5000/- with default stipulation. 2. According to the prosecution case, the appellant and his co-accused brother Pandu Munda first assaulted their father Gangu Munda and thereafter carried him on their bicycle to a jungle. And inside the jungle, both of them committed the most ghastly crime of murdering their own father Gangu Munda. 3. The First Information Report of the incident was lodged at Police Station Salna. The police after investigation filed a charge sheet against the appellant and Pandu Munda. 4. Both appellant and Pandu Munda were tried jointly in the court of Sessions Judge, Nagaon vide Sessions Case No.10/2007. But, after recording of the evidence and at the stage of conclusion of trial, the appellant absconded. The trial court, therefore, declared the appellant as absconder and proceeded with the trial against Pandu Munda. The trial court vide judgment dated 27.6.2012 convicted Pandu Munda under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to life imprisonment and fine of Rs.2000/-. Aggrieved, Pandu Munda filed Criminal Appeal No.74(J)/2012 and a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 9.10.2013 affirmed his conviction and sentence as passed by the trial court. 5. Later, the appellant surrendered whereafter the trial by the impugned judgment has convicted and sentenced him as aforesaid. It is in this background, the appellant has filed the present appeal. 6. The learned counsel for the appellant fairly states that the case of appellant is exactly the same as that of Pandu Munda. And in view of the detailed judgment dated 9.10.2013 passed by the Division Bench in Criminal Appeal No.74(J)/2012, nothing survives in the present appeal. After perusing the judgment dated 9.10.2013 passed by the Division Bench in Criminal Appeal No.74(J)/2012, we, too, are convinced that there is absolutely no difference between the case of appellant and that of Pandu Munda. The Division Bench, after scanning the common evidence brought on record, by giving cogent reasons, has upheld the conviction and sentence of Pandu Munda. We find no good ground to take a different view. The Division Bench, after scanning the common evidence brought on record, by giving cogent reasons, has upheld the conviction and sentence of Pandu Munda. We find no good ground to take a different view. We, therefore, for the reasons given in the judgment dated 9.10.2013 passed in Criminal Appeal No.74(J)/2012 by a Division Bench of this Court, dismiss the present appeal also. 7. The appeal is partly allowed.