Back
2016 Supreme(Jhk) 993
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
D.N. Upadhyay, Ratnaker Bhengra, JJ.
Chamu Oraon - Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand - Respondent
Criminal (Jail) Appeal (DB) No. 528 of 2006
Decided On : 29-03-2016
For the Appellant : Mr. Ram Kishore Prasad
For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandoy
The crucial point of time for ascertaining the existence of circumstances bringing the case within the purview of Section 84 is the time when the offence is committed. The burden of proving the existence of circumstances bringing the case within the exception of Section 84 lies on the accused.
Headnote:
Mental Disorder - Criminal Appeal - Indian Penal Code Section 302, Section 307 - Section 84
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of his wife and two daughters and causing injury to his sister-in-law. The appellant claimed to be suffering from mental disorder at the time of the offence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant did not raise the plea of mental disorder from the institution of the case till the pronouncement of the judgment. No evidence was adduced to prove the appellant's mental disorder at the time of the offence.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellant was entitled to the benefit provided under Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code due to mental disorder at the time of the offence.
Ratio Decidendi: The crucial point of time for ascertaining the existence of circumstances bringing the case within the purview of Section 84 is the time when the offence is committed. The burden of proving the existence of circumstances bringing the case within the exception of Section 84 lies on the accused.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, rejecting the plea of mental disorder under Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code.
D.N. Upadhyay, J.
Heard the parties.
2. This criminal appeal has been preferred from Jail against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 31.01.2006 passed by the Sessions Judge, Latehar in Sessions Trial No. 21/2005 corresponding to G.R. No. 266/2004 arising out of Latehar P.S. Case No. 67/2004 whereby the appellant has been held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.1. for life and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/-. He has further been sentenced to undergo R.1. for seven years under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine, he shall suffer S.I. for two months. All the sentences so passed were to run concurrently.
3. The facts emerging from the fardbayan of Dinesh Oraon, son of Udeshwar Oraon recorded on 02.08.2004 at 9:30 hrs. at Latehar Hospital is that on 02.08.2004 at about 6:00 a.m., while informant was returning home after answering call of nature, he heard alarm raised by his sister. He ran to the place and found that his uncle Chamu Oraon (appellant) has been causing injury to his mother by means of Tangi in the cow shed. Seeing the informant, the appellant went back home, the informant followed him and had seen the appellant causing injury to his wife and daughters namely Sibna Kumari, aged about two and half years and Ribna Kumari, aged about five years. The appellant killed his wife and two daughters by causing injury to them by means of Tangi. He had threatened the informant “if you would come, you would also be done to death.”
The informant took his mother to Hospital for treatment. In the Hospital statement of informant was recorded and a case being Latehar P.S. Case No. 67/2004, dated 02.08.2004 under Section 307, 302, 324 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant was registered.
The police after due investigation submitted charge sheet and accordingly cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and registered as S.T. No. 21/2005. Charges under Section 302, 307 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant were framed to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
The prosecution in order to substantiate charges examined altogether 13 witnesses including informant, doctor and the investigating officer.
During investigation confession of the appellant was recorded by the police and he had admitted his guilt and that confessional statement has been marked Ext.-9. The appellant was also examined under section 164 Cr.P.C. in which too he has admitted his guilt and that confession recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. has been proved as Ext. 10.
The learned Sessions Judge, Latehar at the conclusion of trial placing reliance on the evidence, documents available on record and confessional statements of appellant, held him guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for causing murder of his wife and two daughters and further held him guilty for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code for causing injury to mother of the informant and inflicted sentence as indicated above.
4. Learned counsel Sri Ram Kishore Prasad appointed as amicus curiae, has challenged the impugned Judgment mainly on the ground that the appellant is entitled for the benefit provided under Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant, in his confession recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. has clearly stated that sometimes he becomes mentally derailed. On the date on which he had killed his wife and two daughters and caused injury to his sister-in-law (Bhabhi), his mental condition was not good and in that state of mind, the offence was committed. Whenever he suffers with mental disorder, he used to seek assistance from Ojha and Baidya. Sometimes they say that you are under influence of Ghost.
Subbo Kumari (PW. 12) happens to be daughter of the appellant. She has supported the occurrence in her deposition in Court and said that
