IMPORTANT POINT
As prosecution has tried to substantially improve its case during the course of investigation and then again during the course of trial and the evidence of single eye witness was neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable and there were other infirmities in the trial for offences under Sections 148, 302/149 IPC the appellants - accused are acquitted of the charges framed against them by the Apex Court in this judgment.

JUDGMENT

R.C. Lahoti, J.-Ten accused persons, namely, Chunnu (A1), Lallu (A2), Toro (A3), Gurua (A4), Surja (A5), Sombari (A6), Lakhi (A7), Kapra (A8), Chorey (A9) and Suku (A10) stood trial on charges under Sections 148 and 302 r/w 149 of the IPC for being members of an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons with the common object of committing murder of Suphal Hansda. The Sessions Court held the charges under Sections 148 and 302/149 IPC proved against five accused persons, namely, A1 to A4 and A9. As against accused Nos. 5 to 8, the trial Court considered it safe to record their conviction under Section 147 IPC only. Those held guilty under Section 302/149 IPC were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. A sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year was inflicted under Section 148 of IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. The accused Nos. 5 to 8, who are all women, were directed to be released on admonition under Section 3 of the Prohibition of Offenders Act.

2. Vide order dated 19th June 1989, the trial of Suku Majhi was directed to be separated. Nine accused persons were tried in present proceedings. All the accused persons and the deceased, the complainant and the witnesses are tribals belonging to Majhi community.

3. According to the FIR lodged by Mannu (PW 9) on 21.6.1987 at 2.00 PM, registered at P.S. Jadugoda, Mannu (PW 9) and his elder brother Suphal Hansda had gone to plough the field known as Murabil at about 6.00 AM. While they were ploughing the field, all the accused persons came and surrounded them. The accused persons were armed with weapons like bows and arrows, lathis and tangis. Accused Nos. 1, 2 and 9 dealt tangi blows on the deceased whereupon he fell down. Mannu, having seen the incident, ran away for his life raising hue and cry, but none intervened. All the accused persons left the place of occurrence and moved towards village Rajdhoha. At about midday the witness Mannu returned to the place of occurrence to find that his brother Suphal Hansda was already dead. The family members assembled. The Police had, by this time, reached the place of occurrence. Mohammed Soueb (PW 11) the S.H.O. took down the statement of Mannu on a piece of paper, which was got signed by Mannu and forwarded through the Village Chowkidhar to the Police Station and was registered as First Information Report of the incident. According to the FIR, the genesis of the dispute and the assault which had taken place on that day was the land and it was Kapra Majhain, the accused No. 8 who had collected all the accused persons for assaulting the deceased.

4. Here itself, it may be noted that though the names of all the accused persons are stated in the FIR, the overt act of assault on the deceased is attributed specifically to Chunnu, Lallu and Chorey (A1, A2 and A9). No other accused is specifically alleged to have assaulted the deceased or anyone else. The only act attributed to Chunnu, Lallu and Chorey is of dealing blows on Suphal Hansda by tangi using its reverse side and no other accused is attributed with any specific overt act nor the use of any other weapon of offence with which the accused persons are alleged to have been armed, such as arrows and lathis. This is to be noted in particular because, as would be seen shortly hereinafter, the prosecution has tried to substantially improve its case during the course of investigation and then again during the course of trial.

5. At the trial, the prosecution examined in all 13 witnesses. The star witness is Mannu (PW 9) who is the sole eyewitness to the incident and at his instance the First Information Report of the incident was also recorded. The second set of witnesses consists of PWs 1, 2, 3 and 5 who are the villagers who were ploughing another piece of land belonging to one Lakhan @ Lakhi situated at a distance of about one mile from the place of occurrence. When Mannu (PW 9) made good his escape and was passing by the side of the field of Lakhan, he