JUDGMENT :

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

2. The sole appellant is aggrieved by the impugned Judgment of conviction dated 31.01.2001 and Order of sentence dated 06.02.2001, passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, Khunti, in S.T. No. 488 of 1998, whereby, the appellant, who was facing the trial for the offences under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 3, 4 & 5 of the Explosive Substance Act, has been found guilty and convicted only for the offence under Sections 302 of the Indian penal Code. Upon hearing on the point of sentence, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the said offence.

3. The prosecution case was instituted on the basis of the fardbeyan of Banwari Singh Munda, the son of the deceased Ram Ratan Singh Munda, recorded at his house in village Piska Hatu, P.S. Arki, in the then District of Ranchi, on 18.07.1997, at about 4:00 P.M., wherein he has stated that on the same day at about 10:00 A.M., he had gone to his agriculture field along with his father Ram Ratan Singh Munda and mother Chaiti Devi, for irrigating the field, and while they were returning and reached their village at about 2:30 P.M., near the house of Soma Mahto, the accused Mochi Roy Munda, who was standing on the way, assaulted his father by bomb, which exploded on the body of his father, causing injuries near his right ear, and his father died at the spot. At that time, the informant and his mother were coming behind his father. Thereafter, the accused fled away scaling the wall. He has stated that upon the sound of bomb, several persons came there and saw them, whom he informed about the occurrence. It is also stated in the fardbeyan that the occurrence had taken place due to about twenty years' old land dispute between the parties, for which there was a suit also, which was decreed in favour of the father of the informant. He has also stated that about 21-22 years ago, due to the said land dispute, his father was assaulted by arrow by the late father of this accused, for which also there was a police case. After the death of his father, the accused was also demanding share in the land, which was being denied, as actually he had no share. Claiming that for the said land dispute the accused had assaulted his father by bomb causing his death, the fardbeyan was given by the informant, on the basis of which Arki P.S. Case No. 38 of 1997, corresponding to G.R. No. 377 of 1997, was instituted against the sole accused for the offences under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 3, 4 & 5 of the Explosive Substance Act, 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 the accused Mochi Roy Munda, for the offences under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 3, 4 & 5 of the Explosive Substance Act, and upon the accused's pleading not guilty and claiming to be tried, was put to trial. In course of trial, ten witnesses were examined by the prosecution, including the I.O., and the Doctor, who had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased. Out of the material witnesses examined, P.W.-7 Yogendra Tiwary, P.W.-8 Mahim Puran and P.W.-9 Nildhaj Puran have turned hostile and have not supported the prosecution case at all. P.W.-10 Bindeshwari Ram is only a formal witness and his evidence is not at all important in the case.

5. P.W.-2 Banwari Singh Munda is the informant of the case and the son of the deceased, and P.W.-4 Chaiti Devi is the mother of the informant and the wife of the deceased, and they are the only eye witnesses to the occurrence. Both these witnesses have stated that while they were returning from the agriculture field, this accused had assaulted the deceased by bomb causing his death at the spot. They have also stated about the previous enmity due to the lan