This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 11.10.2004 and the order of sentence dated 12.10.2004 passed by the then Additional Sessions Judge-cum-FTC-II, Gumla in S.T. No. 314 of 2003 whereby and whereunder the court having found the appellant guilty for committing murder of Prem Bhagat and convicted him for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 02.08.2003 at about 9 a.m. the informant’s son namely, Prem Bhagat (deceased) proceeded to go to Ranchi and went to the house of Etwa Bhagat @ Master of his village, whose house is situated nearby the house of informant. After 10 minutes, the informant heard loud noise, and then informant along with his other sons, Gandur Bhagat and Kripal Bhagat went to the house of Etwa Bhagat @ Master whereby they saw that Gandur Oraon was assaulting Prem Bhagat by means of Spade on his head, as a result he fell down. They also saw that, Gandur Oraon, after dropping the said spade there, was fleeing away. Thereafter the informant, his sons, along with the help of other villagers, chased and caught hold the appellant, Gandur Oraon. After they caught hold the present appellant and came back to the spot, they saw the deceased was lying dead and blood was oozing from the back side of the head of the deceased.

Further case of the prosecution is that they came to know that Gandur Oraon had love affair with Indro Devi, the wife of Digamber Bhagat for the last two years and the appellant came to know about the relationship of the deceased with Indro Devi. When the appellant saw the deceased at his house, he assaulted the deceased by means of spade resulting in his death.

3. Thereafter the informant on 02.08.2003 gave his fardbeyan (Ext.5), upon which first information report (Ext.6) of Sisai (Bharno) P.S. Case No. 73 of 2003 was registered for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant. The Investigating Officer (P.W.12) took up the matter for investigation, during which, he held inquest of the dead body of the deceased and prepared inquest report. Thereupon the dead body was sent for post mortem examination which was conducted by Dr. A.D.N. Prasad (P.W.11).

4. After completion of investigation, when the charge sheet was submitted, cognizance of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was taken against the appellant. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions, and the appellant was put on trial.

5. The defence has examined only one witness as D.W.1 and the plea of the defence is complete denial of the allegation, inasmuch as D.W.1 has stated that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case and at the time of occurrence, he was ploughing the field with him.

6. During trial, the prosecution examined as many as twelve witnesses, including the doctor and the Investigating Officer. The trial court after appreciating the evidences of prosecution witnesses and the materials available on record, found the appellant guilty for committing murder of the deceased and accordingly, recorded the judgment of conviction and order of sentence against the appellant, which is under challenge. The motive of the occurrence was that the appellant had suspicion that Prem Bhagat (deceased) had illicit relation with Indro Devi. When the appellant saw the deceased at his house, he assaulted the deceased by means of spade.

7. Based on the evidences of the eye witnesses, Miss. Amrita Banerjee, counsel for the appellant, has assailed the judgment of the learned court below on the following grounds.

(a). All the eye witnesses namely, P.W.3, Tandur Bhagat, P.W.5, Kripal Bhagat and P.W.6, Mahabir Bhagat, are brothers of the deceased and P.W.9, Budhram Bhagat, is the father of the deceased, and thus are the interested witnesses and their statements are not corroborated with any of the independent witness;

(b). In cross-examination, th