IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Navneet Kumar, J.
Diwakar Munda and ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent
Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.292 of 2005
Decided On : 01-09-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 343, 147, 148 & 149, 324, 323, 307 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 161 – Simple and Rigours imprisonment – Offence Punishable – Appeal is directed against Judgment of Conviction and order of sentence passed by learned Additional Judicial Commissioner arising out of Bundu corresponding to appeared that learned court below ordered that all appellants were convicted for offence – Held, Case of default of payment appellants will serve the sentence of Simple Imprisonment for learned trial court is directed to ensure said fine amount is deposited within stipulated period of time deposited by appellants collectively as awarded by this court within stipulated period will serve sentence as awarded in case of default of payment of fine by taking all necessary measures provisions of law – Appeal is allowed.
JUDGMENT :
This appeal is directed against the Judgment of Conviction and order of sentence dated 22.02.2005, passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, in S.T. No.385 (A) /1985, arising out of Bundu P.S. Case No.07 of 1985, corresponding to G.R Case No.46 of 1985, whereby and where under it appeared that the learned court below ordered that all the appellants were convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 343, 147, 148 & 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the I.P.C.) and they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment (hereinafter referred to R.I.) for 2 (two) years under Sections 343, 147, 148 & 149 of I.P.C under all the counts collectively and were also ordered to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousands only) each and in default of payment of fine, the learned Court further directed them to undergo simple imprisonment (hereinafter referred to as the S.I.) for a period of 3 (three) months and it was further directed that all the sentences would to run concurrently.
2. It is found from the record that the report was called for from the concerned Court with respect to the whereabouts of the appellants, which has been received from the officer In-charge, Dasamfall Police Station, Ranchi, which is kept on record at flag-X, by which, it appeared that two of the accused appellants namely Budulal Munda and Shivnath Singh Munda have expired and their death certificates have also been issued by the competent authority, by which it appears that the appellant Budulal Munda had expired on 20.07.2021, whereas the appellant Shivnath Singh Munda had expired on 28.01.2010 and the learned defence counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that since no close relative has come forward to continue with this appeal, it is urged on their behalf that let this appeal be abated with respect to the diseased appellants.
3. Leaned APP appearing on behalf of State submitted that on the basis of the report received; let this appeal be abated with respect to the deceased appellants as aforesaid.
4. Accordingly this appeal is abated with respect to the deceased appellants Budulal Munda and Shivnath Singh Munda by the operation of law, as no close relative has come forward to continue this appeal and therefore the name of the deceased appellants are dropped in the cause title of memo of appeal and the appellants in the present appeal are renumbered accordingly.
5. Now this appeal is heard on behalf of the rest of the appellants, who are alive.
6. The prosecution story arose in the wake of written report dated 06.02.1985 by the informant Sitaram Munda, S/o Late Rooplal Singh Munda addressed to the Officer in-Charge of Bundu Police Station. It was alleged that he had filed several cases of paddy theft against his villagers Diwakar Munda and others which were pending in court. And in some cases the accused persons were absconding and proceeding u/s 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Cr.P.C.) was going against them. About a week back he got information that Bundu Police was taking steps to arrest the accused Malchandra and Shivcharan but they fled away. It was further stated that on 03.02.1985, on Sunday, while he (the informant) and one Mahabir Munda, were going to Bundu and when they reached near the house of Malchandra Munda, then Malchandra Munda and Ban Singh Munda told him that they wanted to talk with him, for which they stopped. In the meantime, his co-villager Sanika Munda with a Lathi in hand, accused Shivnath Singh Munda, S/o Late Ghansirai Munda having Dauli in his hand and accused Shivcharan Singh Munda, s/o Karam Singh Munda having a Tabla in his hand appeared and after this the accused Balchand Munda and Shivcharan Munda told them (the informant and Mahabir Munda) to assault them and to kill because they were trying to get them arrested by the police. It was further alleged that accused Shivcharan Munda holding table hit on his
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to substantiate charges and provide corroborating evidence to support the case against the accused.
The court modified the conviction from attempted murder to a lesser charge due to insufficient evidence of intent and lack of specific identification of the appellants as shooters.
The conviction under Section 307 IPC was overturned due to lack of intention to cause death, while convictions under Sections 323, 324, and 341 IPC were upheld.
The court established that conviction under Section 307 IPC requires clear evidence of intent to kill, which was not proven, leading to the conviction being overturned.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.