Back
PATNA HIGH COURT
D.P.S.Choudhary and M.L.Visa JJ.
Medo Manjhi
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Application No. 75 of 1996 ;
Decided On : AUGUST 23, 1999
CRIMINAL LAW - MURDER - SECTION 302/34, IPC - CONVICTION - SOLE ACCUSED - AID OF SECTION 34, IPC - JUSTIFIED - ABSENCE OF PROOF OF WHO CAUSED FATAL INJURY - INVOLVEMENT OF OTHER PERSONS EVIDENT FROM DIRECT TESTIMONY.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under Sections 364 and 302/34, IPC for kidnapping and murdering the deceased. The prosecution alleged that the appellant and a co-accused, who absconded during the trial, came to the deceased's house and demanded a wristwatch that the deceased had allegedly stolen. When the deceased denied having the watch, the accused threatened him and left. They returned shortly after armed with weapons and dragged the deceased away. The deceased's body was found the next morning with multiple incised injuries.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, including the deceased's family members, was consistent and reliable. The court also found that the medical evidence supported the prosecution's case that the deceased had been killed by sharp-cutting weapons such as those used by the accused.
Issues: 1. Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302/34, IPC was justified in the absence of proof of who caused the fatal injury. 2. Whether the non-examination of the Investigating Officer (IO) caused prejudice to the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the conviction of the appellant under Section 302/34, IPC was justified even though it could not be proven who had caused the fatal injury. The court relied on the Supreme Court decision in Khuji @ Surendra Tiwary v. State of M.P., which held that the conviction for the substantive offence of murder can be sustained with the aid of Section 34, IPC when the involvement of other persons in the crime is evident from the direct testimony. In this case, the court found that the involvement of the appellant and the co-accused in the murder was evident from the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. 2. The court held that the non-examination of the IO did not cause prejudice to the appellant. The court noted that the appellant's counsel had not pointed out any contradiction between the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and their statements made to the IO. The court also noted that the appellant's counsel had not drawn any inference during cross-examination that the witnesses had made different statements to the IO.
Final Decision: The court upheld the appellant's conviction and sentence.
D.P.S.Choudhary and M.L.Visa JJ.
1. The sole appellant has been convicted under Secs. 364 and 302/34, I.P.C. and sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment and imprisonment for life respectively, by the 7th Addl. Sessions Judge, Munger, vide his order dated 11th January, 1996, in Sessions case No. 383/91. Accused-appellant Medo Manjhi and co-accused Tejo Manjhi were facing trial before the Court below, but subsequently, since Tajo Manjhi absconded, his trial was separated.
2. The prosecution case, in brief is that the informant Babulal Manjhi, P.W. 1, in his fardbeyan, Ext. 2, recorded on 21-1-90, at 12 noon by the Officer-Incharge, Dharahra Police Station, district Munger, -stated that on 20/21-1-90, at about 12 in the night, while he was sleeping in his house, appellant Medo Manjhi and accused Tejo Manjhi came to the house and started awakening his son Suresh Manjhi, the deceased. They asked his son to return back the wrist watch, which he had stolen earlier. Suresh Manjhi denied and stated that he had not stolen any wrist watch. Thereupon, an altercation took place and the informant intervened and defended his son. Thereafter, both the accused-persons left the place after threatening him. It is the further case of the prosecution that both the accused immediately returned back armed with Tengari and Farsa and again demanded wrist watch from the deceased Suresh Manjhi. Both of them dragged the deceased towards the village. The informant then raised hulla, but none of the villager turned up. However, the informant and the family members did not follow the accused-persons out of fear. In the morning at about 4 a.m., the informant along with the village Chowkidar enquired from the accused-persons the whereabouts of his son Suresh Manjhi. They replied that they had left his son in Bilokhar. On further query, appellant Medo Manjhi told the informant that his son, Suresh Manjhi, has been cut to death. The informant with the help of the Chowkidar made search of his son and recovered his dead-body in the field of Nepali Singh in mouza Sikranpur.
On the basis of the fardbeyan, Dharahra P.S. case No. 4/90 was registered and after submission of the charge-sheet the trial proceeded in the Court below. The defence case is the denial of the involvement of the appellant. It is alleged that the appellant has been falsely implicated because of the enmity and the son of the informant, Suresh Manjhi, being a criminal was killed by some one else.
3. The prosecution, in all examined, 6 witnesses; out of which, Babulal Manjhi, P.W. 1, the informant is father of the deceased. Gogni Devi, P.W. 2, is the grand-mother of the deceased. P.W. 3, Bansi Manjhi, is another family member of the deceased, who was sleeping along with the deceased in the same house in that night. P.W. 4, Bhamo Devi is the mother of the deceased. P.W. 5, Indradeo Pd. Singh is a formal witness, who has proved, fardbeyan Ext. 2, and the inquest report, Ext. 4 P.W. 6, Dr. Rakesh Kumar Sinha, conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased.
4. The Doctor, P.W. 6, performed the autopsy on 22-1-90 at 6.30 a.m. and found the following ante-mortem injuries:
(I) Incised wound 2 1/2" x 1/2" Cartilage deep running longitudely over the right side of the none cutting the upper lip also.
(II) Incised wound 4" x 1" x occipital bone but just above the pinna horizontally from the left temple to the left occipital region.
(III) Incised wound 4 1/2"x 1" x survical vertebrae deep including soft tissues of the posterior aspect of the neck.
(IV) Incised wound 2" x 1/2" x. bone deep overlying the left knee. (V) 4 incised wounds 1" x 1 1/2" lying apart from each other from left scapulla to left shoulder varing in size 3", 4", 4 1/2", 2" depth, left scapulla cut at places.
In the opinion of the doctor, time elapsed since death was about 36 hours and the cause of death of the deceased was shock and haemorrhage as a result of the above injuries caused by means of sharp-
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
