2017 Supreme(Jhk) 471
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
H.C. MISHRA, ANANDA SEN, JJ.
Yogesh Mahto son of Narayan Mahto and Ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondents
CRIMINAL APPEAL (D.B.) NO. 207, 264 OF 2005 (with I.A. No. 7159 of 2013), 278, 285, 607 OF 2005, 524, 891 OF 2006
Decided On : 19-08-2017
For the appellants : Mr. Kailash Prasad Deo, Mr. Jay Prakash Jha, Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, Mr. Manoj Kumar Sah, Ms. Bandana Kumari Sinha, Mr. Girish Mohan Singh, Mr. Vikash Kumar, Mr. Ravi Raj
For the Respondents: Mr. Satish Kumar Keshri, Mr. S.K. Srivastava, Mr. Azimuddin, Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Deo, Mrs. Laxmi Murmu
Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 302/149 and 148 – Murder – Conviction and sentence – Defence has to show that what prejudice has been caused to them on delayed transmission of FIR – Unexplained delay by itself may not be fatal – Unless serious prejudice was demonstrated to have been suffered by accused, mere delay in sending FIR to Magistrate by itself will not have any deteriorating effect on prosecution case – In instant case, defence has failed to show as to what are prejudice caused to them in delayed transmission of FIR to Court – If no question is put to investigating officer concerning delay, prosecution is under no obligation to give explanation – Defence has not put any question to investigating officer on point of delay in transmission of FIR to Court – Defence cannot take plea that delayed transmission of FIR is fatal for prosecution – However, there is doubt that appellants are persons who committed murder or not – Since there was long standing dispute between parties, there is probability of false implication of appellants – Appellants are entitled to be given benefit of doubt – Appellants acquitted.
Ananda Sen, J.
These 7 (seven) criminal appeals, filed by 11 convicts have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment as the same arise out of the same Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence.
2. The appellants herein have been found guilty for offences under Sections 148 and 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code by Judgment of conviction dated 19.01.2005 passed in Sessions Case No.39 of 2003/64 of 2000 by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Godda. After finding these appellants guilty under Sections 148 and 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code, by an order dated 19.01.2005, all these appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years for offence under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs.5000/- for the offence under Sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine amount, they are also to undergo simple imprisonment for one month.
3. The prosecution case is based upon the fardbeyan of Dilip Kumar Mahto (P.W.10), which was recorded at 11.50 Hrs. on 05.09.1999. The prosecution case in brief is that on 05.09.1999, at about 06.00 a.m. Dhiraj Mahto [appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 285 of 2005] came to the house of the informant and requested his father Sheo Pujan Mahto (deceased) to accompany him to Thakurgangti Police Station for some urgent work. Sheo Pujan Mahto accompanied said Dhiraj Mahto on a cycle at about 07.00 a.m. When Sheo Pujan Mahto did not return, the informant got anxious and informed his uncle Nagendra Prasad Mahto and his cousin grandfather Kashinath Mahto. These three persons then went out in search of Sheo Pujan Mahto on foot. When they reached near the tank of Bihari Village at about 10.45 a.m., they saw, the informant's father coming alone riding his cycle. When Sheo Pujan Mahto reached near the Mango trees of Bihari Maidan, the accused Sadanand Thakur son of Shibu Thakur [appellant in Cr. Appeal No. 891 of 2006] Gopal Mahto son of Vijay Mahto [appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 207 of 2005), Jitu Mahto son of Bhagwan Mahto [appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 264 of 2005], Permanand Mahto [appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 278 of 2005), Shyam Lal Mahto son of Panchdeo Mahto [appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 278 of 2005], Dev Narayan Mahto son of late Samroo Mahto [appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 207 of 2005], Budhinath Mahto (Sarpanch) [appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 207 of 2005), Yogesh Mahto son of Narayan Mahto [appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 207 of 2005], Beloon Mahto son of Dayal Mahto and Koila Mahto [appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 207 of 2005] and 6-7 unknown persons suddenly came out and surrounded his father. All these persons were armed with deadly weapons like Pharsa, Garasa, Chheoni etc. Koila Mahto and Dev Narayan Mahto caught hold of the cycle of the deceased, then Shyam Lal Mahto and Jeetu Mahto assaulted him on the back of his head by Chheoni and Garasa as a result of which, Shiv Pujan Mahto fell down from his cycle. No sooner he fell from his cycle, Parmanand Mahto, Sadanand Thakur, Budhinath Mahto, Yogesh Mahto, Beloon Mahto and Gopal Mahto pinned him down on the road along with the cycle and Parmanand Mahto, who was armed with a chheoni, severed the neck of Shiv Pujan Mahto and separated the head from the body. On seeing this, the informant and the two persons accompanying him screamed and shouted for help, but no one came to help them. On seeing the informant, 4-5 aggressors chased the informant, as a result of which the informant ran towards Bihari Village and thereafter, these appellants and others went towards the eastern side of the field shouting “Shanti Pal Jindabad” slogans and throwing pamphlets. Thereafter, this informant, his uncle and cousin grandfather went near the deceased and saw the deceased lying on the road in a pool of blood. The right leg of the deceased was under the bicycle and left leg was