Back
2014 Supreme(Jhk) 99
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
D.N. PATEL AND P.P. BHATT, JJ.
Mangar Ray - Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent
Cr. Appeal (DB) No.529 of 2003
Decided on: January 16, 2014
Advocate Appeared
For the Appellant :Mr. Bijaya Kishore Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Ravi Prakash, A.P.P.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on trustworthy eyewitness testimonies and corroborative medical evidence in determining the guilt of the appellant for murder.
Headnote:
Murder - Criminal Law - Section 302 of the I.P.C. - [Section 302] - The judgment discusses the prosecution's case, contradictions in witness testimonies, medical evidence, and the role of the appellant in causing the murder. The court evaluates the trustworthiness of the witnesses, the corroborative nature of the medical evidence, and the role of the Investigating Officer in the case.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of Lodhar Mahto based on the prosecution's case, which included eyewitness testimonies and medical evidence. The defense argued major omissions, contradictions, and improvements in the witness depositions, as well as the unreliability of the eyewitnesses.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the eyewitness testimonies, especially that of the informant and son of the deceased, were trustworthy and reliable. The medical evidence corroborated the eyewitness accounts, and the Investigating Officer's role was evaluated in the context of the case.
Issues: The issues revolved around the trustworthiness of the eyewitness testimonies, contradictions in the evidence, and the role of the Investigating Officer.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the trustworthiness of the eyewitness testimonies, the corroborative nature of the medical evidence, and the overall evaluation of the case to uphold the conviction of the appellant for murder.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence of the appellant for the murder of Lodhar Mahto were upheld.
Per D.N. Patel, J.
1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court I, Deoghar, in Sessions Case No.7 of 1993/272 of 2002. This appellant has been convicted for life imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the I.P.C. for causing murder of Lodhar Mahto.
2. The case of the prosecution is as under :
The prosecution case is that on 27.1.92 at 4.30 P.M. the informant Arun Kumar Yadav (i.e.PW5) gave fardbeyan to police that on 27.1.1992 at 2.10 p.m., after unloading the brick from the tractor in his field, which is situated 30 yard northeast from his house, he was reversing the tractor. At that time Shepherd of the informant namely Bhagirath Ray was returning after grazing the sheeps and when shepherd reached near the house of informant, then accused Mangal Ray, Hemlal Ray, Bharath Mahto, Lithu Mahto, Khubi Ray, Kalachand Ray, Arbind Chaudhary & Jay Naryan Mahto came near the sheep and tried to lift the sheep for slaughtering. The Shepherd protested them and went inside the house, where the father of the informant Lodhar Mahto (deceased) was taking meal with other six labourers. Then father of the informant left the meal and came outside the house and protested to it, then all accused persons went inside the house of Jhalku Mahto and Kalabati Devi, Wife of Jhalku Mahto gave one Hasua to Mangar Ray, one Dabh to Hemlal, one Barchhito to Kalachand Ray, one danda to Ketki Ray from her house. Then Jhalko Mahto ordered them to kill Lodhar Mahto, then Mangar Ray gave a Hasua blow on the neck of his father and the vain was cut and blood started coming and he fell on the ground. Shiv Prasad Mahto the uncle of the informant came to save the father of informant, then Kalalchand and Hemlal assaulted them with lathi. The accused persons also assaulted the Shepherd Bhagirath Ray. The father of the informant died at the spot. Thereafter the accused persons fled away, when the villagers assembled there. It was further alleged by the informant that the accused persons are criminals and they used to bring some unknown persons in their house and Jhalku Mahto is also associated with that 'Gang'. The informant with his family members used to protest it, so this occurrence took place.
Ten witnesses were examined by the prosecution :
P.W.1 Jamun He is the Eye witness of the occurrence. He deposed that
Mahto Mangar Ray gave a Hasua blow on the neck of Lodhra Mahto and Lodhar Mahto died in 2-3 minutes.
P.W.-2 Bhagirath Declared Hostile witness
Ray
P.W.-3 Shiv Mahto He is a brother of deceased Lodhar Mahto and is Eye
witness of the occurrence. He deposed that Mangar Ray gave a Hasua blow on the neck of Lodhar Mahto and he fell down and died. He has also proved his signature on Seizure list i.e. marked as Ext.1.
P.W.-4 Shakti Mahto He is the Eye witness of the occurrence. He deposed that
Mangar Ray gave a Hasua blow on the neck of Lodhar Mahto, who fell down and died.
P.W.-5 Arun Kumar He is the informant of this case and is a son of deceased
Yadav Lodhar Mahto. He is the Eye witness of the occurrence. He deposed that Mangar Ray assaulted Lodhar Mahto by Hasua on his neck and he fell down and died. He has proved the fardbeyan i.e. marked as Ext.2.
P.W.-6 Baikunth He is the eye witness of the occurrence. He deposed that
Mahto Mangar Ray gave a Hasua blow on the neck of Lodhar Mahto, who fell down and died. He has also proved his signature and signature of one Shiv Prasad Mahto on Death, Inquest report and Seizure List i.e. marked as Ext.3 to 3/2.
P.W.-7 Govind He is a brother of deceased Lodhar Mahto and is Eye witn-
Mahto ess of the occurrence. He also deposed that Mangar Ray gave a Hasua blow on the neck of Lodhar Mahto, who fell down and died.
P.W.-8 Ram He is the Investigating Officer of this case. He has prove
