Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1444 (JHR)

Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta v. State of Jharkhand

2022-12-22

AMBUJ NATH, RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

body2022
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned A.P.P for the State. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.09.2017 passed by Shri Diwakar Pandey, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-XVIII, Ranchi, in connection with S.T. No. 525/2013, arising out of Sonahatu (Rahe) P.S. Case No. 20/2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 1229/2013, holding the appellant Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta guilty of offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, in default of payment of fine, he was further directed to undergo R.I. for one year. 3. The case of the prosecution was instituted on the basis of 'fardbeyan' of the informant, Sanmati Devi, alleging therein that on 11.03.2013 at about 05:00 P.M., her husband Madan Bhokta along with his cousin Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta had gone to castrate a male calf in the house of Benga Munda @ Chaitan Munda, situated at Village Kokradih. There after her husband did not return. On the next day, i.e. on 12.03.2013 his dead body was found lying on the metallic road near Kokradih village. His head was crushed by a stone. Suspicion was raised upon the appellant Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta that due to land dispute, he had committed the murder of the deceased Madan Bhokta. 4. After investigation, Police found the occurrence to be true and submitted charge-sheet against the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code on 20.05.2013. After cognizance, Sri S.B. Ojha learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, committed the case to the court of sessions on 07.06.2013, as it was exclusively triable by sessions court. 5. Charge was framed against the appellant on 09.07.2013 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The Contents of charge were read over and explained to him in Hindi to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has adduced both oral and documentary evidence. Banshidhar Bhokta P.W.-1, Bharat Bhokta P.W.-2, Rameshwar Bhogta P.W.-5, Kartik Mahto P.W.-6, Kala Chand Bhokta P.W.-7 are hearsay witnesses, but aforesaid witnesses had seen the dead body of the deceased and have stated that head of the deceased was crushed. 6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has adduced both oral and documentary evidence. Banshidhar Bhokta P.W.-1, Bharat Bhokta P.W.-2, Rameshwar Bhogta P.W.-5, Kartik Mahto P.W.-6, Kala Chand Bhokta P.W.-7 are hearsay witnesses, but aforesaid witnesses had seen the dead body of the deceased and have stated that head of the deceased was crushed. Chaitan Munda P.W.-3 has supported the fact that both appellant and the deceased had come to his house for castrating a male calf and they returned together at about 8 A.M. He has also proved his signature on the seizure list, which is exhibit-1. Hira Lal Mahto (P.W.-4) is the witness of seizure of blood stained stone and shirt, he has proved his signature of the seizure lists, which are exhibit-2 series. Julen Shishir Murmu (P.W.-8) is the investigating officer of this case, he has proved the fardbeyan which is exhibit-3 and he also proved the formal F.I.R., which is exhibit-4, he has further proved the inquest report which is exhibit-5. He had seized the blood stained stone and blood stained soil from the place of occurrence, he has proved the seizure list, which is exhibit-6, he has also proved the seizure list relating to the recovery of blood stained shirt from the house of the appellant, which was marked as Exhibit-6/1. Dr. Manoj Kumar Kora (P.W.9) had performed postmortem on the dead body of the deceased Madan Bhokta, he has proved the postmortem report, which is exhibit-7. Letter forwarding the blood stained stone and blood stained Shirt for forensic examination to SFSL, Ranchi is exhibit -8. SFSL report is exhibit-9. 7. On the basis of the evidence, both oral and documentary, the learned court below held the appellant guilty and sentenced him accordingly. 8. Mr. Abhishek Kumar Dubey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that there is no eye witness to the occurrence. It was further submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt. He has been held guilt only on the basis of suspicion. On these grounds, it was prayed that the appellant be acquitted of the charge. Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State has submitted that the appellant was seen going alongwith the deceased to house of Chaitan Munda @ Benga Munda. He has been held guilt only on the basis of suspicion. On these grounds, it was prayed that the appellant be acquitted of the charge. Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State has submitted that the appellant was seen going alongwith the deceased to house of Chaitan Munda @ Benga Munda. Chaitan Munda @ Benga Munda has stated that the appellant and the deceased returned from his house on the same night and thereafter, deceased was found murdered. Prosecution has also been able to show that there was a land dispute between the parties. He further submitted that blood stained shirt was recovered from house of the appellant. It was further submitted that from the SFSL report, which is exhibit -9, it is apparent that blood found on the stone recovered from the place of occurrence was similar to the blood found over shirt recovered from the house of the appellant. Accordingly, it was submitted that prosecution has been able to prove its case against appellant beyond all reasonable doubt and as such, this appeal be dismissed. 9. Now, it has to be ascertained whether the prosecution has been able to prove its case against the appellant beyond the shadow of all reasonable doubts. 10. It is case of the prosecution that the deceased Madan Bhokta died a homicidal death. Banshidhar Bhokta (P.W.-1), Bharat Bhokta (P.W.- 2), Chaitan Munda (P.W.-3), Rameshwar Bhogta (P.W.-5), Kartik Mahto (P.W.-6) and Kala Chand Bhokta (P.W.-7) all have stated that they have seen the dead body of the deceased Madan Bhokta. His head was crushed and the dead body was lying in a pool of blood. 11. Julen Shishir Murmu (P.W.8), is the investigating officer of this case has stated that he had gone to the place of occurrence and prepared the inquest report, which is exhibit-5. From the perusal of the inquest report (exhibit-5), it transpires that the head of the deceased Madan Bhokta was crushed. 12. Dr. Manoj Kumar Kora (P.W.9) has stated that on 12.03.2013, he had performed postmortem on the dead body of the deceased and found the following injuries:- (i) Average built, Rigor Mortis present all over the body, abdomen not distended, dry blood stains on face, neck and clothes. 12. Dr. Manoj Kumar Kora (P.W.9) has stated that on 12.03.2013, he had performed postmortem on the dead body of the deceased and found the following injuries:- (i) Average built, Rigor Mortis present all over the body, abdomen not distended, dry blood stains on face, neck and clothes. (ii) Abrasion:- (i) 2 cm x 2 cm on front of left knee, (ii) 4 cm x 1cm front of right forehead, (iii) 3 cm x 2 cm on right cheek upper part, (iv) 6 cm x 4 cm on right cheek middle part, (v) 3 cm X 1 cm on front of right cheek and (vi) 7 cm x ½ cm, 6 cm x ½ cm on back of right shoulder. (iii) Lacerated Wound:- (i) 2 cm X 1 cm X bone deep on front of right forehead, (ii) 3 cm X 1 cm x bone deep on right forehead, lateral side, (iii) 2 cm x 1 cm X bone deep right eyebrow, lateral side, (iv) 2 cm X 1 cm X bone deep right temporal region. (iv) Internal : Fracture of right side of maxilla bone and right mandible bone. Diffused contusion of both temporal-Parieto frontal scalp and both temporal muscles and mosic fracture of both temporo-Parieto frontal bone. Laceration of soft tissue, dural matter in brain. Contusion of brain and presence of subdural blood and blood clot on both side of brain. Internal organs pale. According to this witness death of the deceased was due to head injuries caused by hard and blunt substance like stone. 13. From the perusal of the postmortem report (exhibit- 7), it is apparent that the oral testimony of Dr. Manoj Kumar Kora (P.W.9) in the court is corroborated by his finding in the postmortem report (exhibit-7). From the aforesaid ocular account of the prosecution witnesses, it is apparent that all have corroborated that they have seen the deceased Madan Bhokat lying in the pool of blood and his head was crushed. This fact is corroborated by the findings in the inquest report and also by the Dr. Manoj Kumar Kora (P.W.9), who had performed postmortem of the deceased Madan Bhokta, accordingly, we come to a finding that the deceased Madan Bhokta died a homicidal death. 14. It is further case of the prosecution that the appellant Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta had caused a homicidal death of the deceased Madan Bhokta. Manoj Kumar Kora (P.W.9), who had performed postmortem of the deceased Madan Bhokta, accordingly, we come to a finding that the deceased Madan Bhokta died a homicidal death. 14. It is further case of the prosecution that the appellant Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta had caused a homicidal death of the deceased Madan Bhokta. There is no eye witness of the occurrence. The entire prosecution case rests upon some circumstantial evidence. It is case of prosecution that the deceased Madan Bhokta and the appellant Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta had gone to house of Benga Munda @ Chaitan Munda, to castrate a male calf, while returning from his house he crushed the head of Madan Bhokta due to which he died. The informant Sanmati Devi has not been examined. 15. Banshidhar Bhokta P.W.1, Bharat Bhokta P.W.-2 and Rameshwar Bhogta P.W.5 all have stated that both the deceased and the appellant had gone to the house of Chaitan Munda and thereafter Madan Bhokta did not return. Chaitan Munda (P.W.-3) has supported the prosecution case and stated that about one year three months ago Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta and Madan Bhokta had come to his house to castrate a male calf. At about 8:00 p.m. they left his house. On the next day he heard that Madan Bhokta has been murdered. Police seized a blood stained stone from there and prepared the seizure list, he has identified his signature on seizure list, which is exhibit-1, he has not been cross-examined on the point that the deceased Madan Bhokta and the appellant Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta left his house together. Hira Lal Mahto P.W.-4 has stated that police has seized a blood stained shirt from house of the appellant, he has further stated that police also seized a blood stained stone from the place of occurrence, he has identified his signature on the seizure lists, which are exhibit- 2 series. 17. From the aforesaid oral testimony of the prosecution witnesses, it is apparent that appellant Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta and deceased Madan Bhokta had gone to the house of Bonga Munda @ Chaitan Munda to Kokrodih. 17. From the aforesaid oral testimony of the prosecution witnesses, it is apparent that appellant Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta and deceased Madan Bhokta had gone to the house of Bonga Munda @ Chaitan Munda to Kokrodih. Bonga Munda @ Chaitan Munda (P.W.3) in whose house both the deceased and appellant had gone for castrating a male calf has corroborated that both the appellant and deceased had come to his house and then left his house at 8:00 P.M., thereafter, deceased was found murdered. Julen Shishir Murmu P.W.8 has stated that he had seized blood stained stone from the place of occurrence, which was used in committing the murder of the deceased Madan Bhokta. He has further stated that he also seized a blood stained Shirt from the house of the appellant. The seizure list relating to recovery of blood stained stone has been adduced in evidence, which is exhibit-6. From perusal of this seizure list, it reflect that a blood stained stone was recovered from the place of occurrence and witnesses Chaitan Munda P.W.-3 and Hira Lal Mahto P.W.-4 had put their signature on the seizure list. From perusal of the seizure list relating to the recovery of blood stained Shirt from the house of the appellant, which is exhibit -6/1, it transpires that on 12.03.2013 at about 4:00 p.m. a blood stained shirt was recovered from the house of the appellant. Seizure witnesses have also supported the factum of recovery of both blood stained stone and blood stained shirt from the place of occurrence. From perusal of the SFSL report exhibit-9, it appears that the blood found on the stone used in commission of the murder of the deceased and that on the Shirt, so recovered from the house of the appellant matched and they were of human origin. 18. From the aforesaid fact and circumstances, it is evident that the prosecution has been able to show that the appellant Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta and deceased Madan Bhokta had gone together to house of Bonga Munda @ Chaitan Munda to castrate a male calf. While returning Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta committed his murdered by crushing his head. Blood on the Shirt recovered from the house of the appellant matched the blood found on the stone used in the commission of the murder of the deceased. While returning Sohan Bhokta @ Sohan Bhogta committed his murdered by crushing his head. Blood on the Shirt recovered from the house of the appellant matched the blood found on the stone used in the commission of the murder of the deceased. Blood on both the Shirt and the stone were of human origin. Banshidhar Bhokta P.W.1, Bharat Bhokta P.W.-2 and Rameshwar Bhogta P.W.5 all have stated that there was land dispute between the appellant and the deceased. 19. Accordingly, we are of the view that the prosecution has been able to complete the chain of circumstances against the appellant that he and only he had committed murder of Madan Bhokta. 20. The learned court below has considered and dealt all the material aspect of this case and as such, judgment of conviction does not require any interference. The sentence passed by leaned court below is commensurate with the gravity of the offence. 21. This appeal is dismissed. 22. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.