The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on consistent eyewitness testimony, post-mortem evidence, and motive to establish guilt in a criminal case.

Kishore Kumar Mandal, J.

1. Appellants Chinta Devi and Vishundeo Giri are the parents of appellant Munna Giri. All the three appellants were tried and convicted under Section 302/34 IPC read with Section 120B IPC for having caused death of minor son of the informant vide judgment of conviction dated 10.10.2012 passed in S.T. No. 50 of 2012 and by order of sentence dated 12.10.2012, they have been sentenced to undergo R.I. for life with fine having default clause.

2. It is a case where two fardbeyans were recorded. The occurrence had taken place in the evening of 13.08.2011 when the three appellants are said to have assaulted four and a half years old son of the informant with bricks/stones and knife when he had gone to ease near the pond close to the Jain temple. The victim, having received injury at the hands of the accuseds-appellants, was immediately taken to the Ara Sadar Hospital and from there to Patna where he was hospitalized in a local hospital and, in course of treatment, on the following day at 9 a.m., he was declared dead. The officer-in-charge of the local police station reached the hospital and recorded the fardbeyan of the informant (Ext.-4) within half an hour of the death of his son. The death inquest proceeding was carried out by him and the dead body was sent to the Patna Medical College Hospital for post mortem examination. Upon conclusion of the autopsy, the body was handed over to the informant and he came back to the village and cremated the dead body on the same day. The following morning i.e. on 15.08.2011, the S.H.O., Gajrajganj Police Out Post reached the village and recorded the fardbeyan of the informant (Ext.-6) at 11.30 a.m.. The fardbeyan recorded on 15.08.2011 gave rise to drawing up of a formal F.I.R. (Ext.-7) where after the investigation was taken up. It would be pertinent to note here that only one investigation was carried out pursuant to the lodging of the fardbeyan (Ext.-6).

3. The prosecution case, as unfolded in Ext.-6, in brief, is that on the relevant date and time of occurrence, the informant was at his roof top and watching his four and a half year old son who had gone to attend call of nature near the pond which is few yards away from the house of the informant. In the meantime, the appellants arrived at the place of occurrence and started assaulting his son with bricks/stones. The informant immediately came down the roof top and rushed to the place of occurrence along with other witnesses and could see that his son was dragged close to the temple structure where also he was assaulted. Seeing the informant and the other witnesses, they left the place of occurrence leaving his son lying injured on wet grass close to the pond. Upon registration of the case, P.W.-7 took up the investigation. In the meantime, the copy of the fardbeyan recorded by the Jakkanpur Police Station in Patna (Ext.-4), the inquest report (Ext.-5) and the post mortem report (Ext.-8) were forwarded to the I.O. who made those documents part of the investigation record. The place of occurrence was inspected by the I.O. The statements of witnesses were recorded. In the meantime, the arrest of appellants Chinta Devi and Vishundeo Giri were secured on 05.08.2011. Finding the accusations true against the appellants, charge-sheet was laid whereon cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial where after learned trial Court framed charges under Sections 302/34 and 120B IPC which were read over and explained to the appellants to which they pleaded not guilty. Hence the trial.

4. With a view to prove the charges, the prosecution examined eight witnesses at the trial. P.W.-1 Arjun Giri (brother of the deceased), P.W. 2 Rajesh Giri, (brother of the informant), P.W.-3 Neelam Devi (mother of the deceased), P.W.-4 Awadhesh Kumar (co-villager) apart from P.W.-5 narrated the ocular version of the prosecution case. P.W.-6 is a formal witness who proved Ext.-4 and the inquest report (Ext.