SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Jhk) 387

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
H.C. MISHRA, B.B. MANGALMURTI, JJ.
Karma Oraon - Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 119 of 1996 (R)
Decided on : 06-07-2018

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Yogendra Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, Adv.

The consistent testimonies of eyewitnesses, seizure of weapons, and post-mortem reports were crucial in establishing the guilt of the accused under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code - Conviction under Section 302/34 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Indian Penal Code, Section 302/34 - The court discussed the prosecution's case based on the fardbeyan of the informant, witness testimonies, post-mortem reports, and the seizure of weapons. The court affirmed the conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

Fact of the Case:

The prosecution's case was based on the fardbeyan of the informant, witness testimonies, and post-mortem reports. The appellant and his father were found guilty and convicted for the offences under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for assaulting and causing the death of the deceased during a land dispute.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the appellant guilty based on consistent testimonies of eyewitnesses, seizure of weapons, and post-mortem reports. The court affirmed the conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

Issues: The issues revolved around the credibility of witness testimonies, the seizure of weapons, and the post-mortem reports to establish the guilt of the accused under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Ratio Decidendi: The consistent testimonies of eyewitnesses, seizure of weapons, and post-mortem reports were crucial in establishing the guilt of the accused under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Final Decision: The court affirmed the conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and dismissed the appeal. The appellant was directed to undergo the sentence, and the victim was recommended for compensation under the victim compensation scheme.

JUDGMENT :

B.B. Mangalmurti, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.

2. The sole appellant is aggrieved by the impugned Judgment of conviction dated 20.05.1996 and Order of sentence dated 21.05.1996, passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Gumla, in Sessions Trial No. 236 of 1995, whereby, the appellant along with his father, the co-accused Roto Oraon, has been found guilty and convicted for the offences under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Upon hearing on the point of sentence, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for life for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

The appellant Roto Oraon died during the pendency of this appeal, as such his name was deleted vide order dated 12.4.2018.

3. The prosecution case is based on the fardbeyan of Birso Orain stating that at about 9/10 a.m. she along with her husband Jatru Oraon and his son Birsa Oraon and Hal Nahas, Eta Kharia and Pusha Kharia had gone to sow paddy in their field Kusumdon situated at a distance of 1 km. from the village. The informant went for drinking water at the well of the paddy field which was at a distance of 500 yards, at that time Roto Oraon and Karmu Oraon came and started assaulting her husband and son with basula tangi and kutti. Her husband and son ran towards the field of Dhondhi Chick Baraik to save their life but both the accused persons chased them and assaulted on their head as a result of which both fell down and died. She ran from the well but by that time they had died. She stated that this occurrence was witnessed by Hal Nahas, Eta Kharia and Pusha Kharia also.

The villagers also came there on hulla. She stated that her husband had previous dispute with both accused persons relating to partition. She further stated that earlier Panchayti was held and the Panches had divided the lands among them and half of the land was given to her husband Jatru Oraon and another half was given to Roto Oraon, his brother. After this partition her husband and son had gone there for sowing paddy but Roto Oraon and his son assaulted them and committed their murder. On the basis of the fardbeyan, Gumla P.S. Case No. 108 of 1995, corresponding to G.R. No. 381 of 1995, was instituted for the offences under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, against the accused Roto Oraon and Karmu alias Karma Oraon and investigation was taken up. After investigation, the police submitted the charge-sheet in the case.

4. After commitment of the case to the Court of Session, charge was framed against both accused for the offences under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, and upon the accuseds' pleading not guilty and claiming to be tried, they were put to trial. In course of trial, thirteen witnesses were examined by the prosecution, including the Investigating Officer and the Doctor, who had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead bodies of the deceased.

5. Out of the material witnesses examined, P.W.-1 Birso Orain is informant of this case. P.W.2 is Roto Kharia, P.W.3 Eta Kharia P.W.4 is Pusha Kharia, P.W.5 is Bandhu Oraon, P.W.6 is Gandur Kharia, and P.W.7 is Makru Kharia who have supported the case. P.W.10 is Dr. R.K. Beck, who has conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Jatru Oraon, P.W.9 is Dr. A.D.N. Prasad who has examined the accused Roto Oraon, P.W.12 is Dr. Manibhushan Prasad who conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Birsa Oraon P.W.11 is Bandhan Sahu, I.O. of this case. P.W.8 is Chunnu Oraon tendered for cross-examination. P.W.13 is Sri A.N. Upadhyay, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gumla. Accused Roto Oraon and Karmu Oraon were examined under 313 Cr.P.C in which they denied the evidence.

6. P.W.1 is Birso Orain who stated that on the date of occurrence her husband and son gone to plough the field for sowing paddy along with Hal Nahas, Eta Kharia and Pusha Kharia and she also accompanied them. She went for drinking water on the well. At t






























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top