Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2018 Supreme(Jhk) 2810

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Mr. Kailash Prasad Deo, J.
Pedu Gope & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State Of Jharkhand - Respondent
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 665 of 2004 (Against the Judgment of conviction dated 19.02.2004 and order of sentence dated 20.02.2004, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.-V, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum, in Sessions Trial No. 131 of 2003)
Decided On : 18-12-2018

Advocates Appeared:
Shankar Lal Agarwal, and Asha Kumari, Advocates, for the Appellant; Laxmi Murmu, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State

The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt, especially regarding the nature and severity of injuries in cases involving assault and death.

Headnote:
Indian Penal Code - Assault - Sections 304 part II, 323 - The judgment discusses the conviction of the appellants for the offence committed and punishable under Sections 304 part II of the Indian Penal Code and Pedu Gope under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt under Section 304 part II and acquitted the appellants from this charge, upholding their conviction under Section 323. The sentence was modified to the period already undergone by the appellants.
Fact of the Case:

The case involved an incident where the appellants were convicted for assaulting two individuals, resulting in injuries and subsequent death of one of the victims. The prosecution alleged that the appellants assaulted the victims during a panchayati over a dispute regarding a cock and a hen.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt under Section 304 part II of the Indian Penal Code against the appellants. The court upheld the conviction under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and modified the sentence to the period already undergone by the appellants.
Issues: The issues revolved around the nature of the injuries, the motive behind the assault, and the sufficiency of evidence to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt under Section 304 part II of the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of conclusive evidence to establish that the injuries sustained by the victims were sufficient to cause death, leading to the acquittal of the appellants from the charge under Section 304 part II of the Indian Penal Code.
Final Decision: The Criminal appeal preferred by the appellants was partly allowed with modification in conviction and sentence. The appellants' bail bonds were cancelled, and the judgment was to be sent to the court concerned.

JUDGMENT

Kailash Prasad Deo, J. - Heard, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Shankar Lal Agarwal assisted by Mrs. Asha Kumari, Advocate and learned counsel for the State, Mrs. Laxmi Murmu, learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

2. The instant Criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction dated 19.02.2004 and order of sentence dated 20.02.2004, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.-V, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum, in Sessions Trial No. 131 of 2003, whereby, these appellants have been convicted for the offence committed and punishable under Sections 304 part II of the Indian Penal Code and Pedu Gope has also been convicted for the offence committed and punishable under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned trial Court has acquitted Suru Gope from the charge framed against him. The learned trial Court has awarded Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and in default in payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months to all the convicts. Pedu Gope has further been awarded Rigorous Imprisonment for six months for the offence committed and punishable under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences of Pedu Gope are directed to run concurrently.

3. The prosecution case, is based upon the written report submitted by informant, Bindaban Gope (P.W.1) recorded by Officer-In-Charge, Govindpur, Jamshedpur Police Station on 26.06.1995, wherein, the informant has stated that, on 22.06.1995, Thursday, the informant Bindaban Gope(P.W.1), a resident of Loabasa under Govindpur Police Station, District-East Singhbhum, had gone to village-Dabha, P.S. Balrampur, District Purulia(West Bengal), with his entire family members and at that time, he handed over his one cock and one hen to his uncle, Chuna Gope, being his neighbour, to took after it. On 24.06.1995, Saturday at 3.00 P.M., he returned with his entire family members from his village and thereafter, he inquired from his uncle about his cock and hen, who told him that he has released it for pasturing. In the meantime, his another uncle Gobind Gope told him that he ate a cock and hen was not traced out despite intensive search. On the following day i.e. 25.06.1995 at 7.00P.M. a Panchayati was called upon for cock and hen. In the panchayat, the villagers were coming. Accused Pedu Gope having a hockey stick in his hand, Pagla Gope having a wooden piece in his hand and Kumhara Gope having a lathi in his hand came there and Pedu Gope inflicted a hockey stick blow on the left temple of uncle of informant, Chuna Gope and another blow on the head of father-inlaw of the informant, Indra Gope(P.W.3) causing bleeding injury on the temple of Chuna Gope and bleeding injury on the head of Indra Gope. Chuna Gope was further assaulted by Pagla Gope with wooden piece and Kumhara Gope with lathi on his body. In the meantime, persons assembled in Panchayati tried to hold them but they fled away. Accused, Suru Gope was abusing along with them.

4. On the basis of the written report of the informant, the Police has registered First Information Report bearing Telco(Govindpur) P. S. Case No. 119 of 1995, dated 26.06.1995, under Sections 341/323/325/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the four accused persons namely, Pedu Gope @ Peru Gope, Pagla Gope, Kumhara Gope and Suru Gope.

5. After completion of the investigation, the police has submitted charge sheet vide no.148 of 1995 dated 30.08.1995, under Sections 304/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the above named accused persons.

6. The cognizance of the offence has been taken vide order dated 14.09.1995 and the case has been committed to the Court of Sessions vide order dated 21.03.1996.

7. The learned trial Court has framed charge against all the accused/appellants on 02.07.1996 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, subsequently, vide order dated 21.10.2003 Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code has been added and Pedu Gope @ P

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis