Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, SUBHASH CHAND, JJ.
Bhim Singh son of Late Janki Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar (now Jharkhand) - Respondent
Cr. Appeal (DB) No.37 of 1994 (R)
Decided on : 31-01-2023
Section 302/34 - Indian Penal Code - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted for the offence under Section 302/34 and Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of the deceased. The prosecution alleged that the accused persons surrounded the deceased and assaulted him with bombs, pistol, and chhura, resulting in his death. The trial court convicted the appellants based on the testimony of the informant and other witnesses.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the testimony of the informant and other witnesses to be credible and corroborated by the medical evidence, inquest report, and seizure memo. The court also held that the non-examination of the Investigating Officer did not prejudice the prosecution's case. The court dismissed the grounds raised by the appellants and concluded that the charge against the appellants had been proved beyond all reasonable doubt.
Issues: The issues included the non-examination of the Investigating Officer, lack of reference to the Explosive Substance Act and the Arms Act, absence of material exhibits, and alleged contradictions in the evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the testimony of witnesses, even if related to the deceased, should not be discarded solely on that basis. The court also highlighted that minor discrepancies in the evidence should not affect the credibility of the witnesses. Additionally, the court stressed the importance of reading the evidence as a whole and evaluating it in its entirety.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, modified the order of sentence to include a fine, and directed the appellants to surrender and serve the remaining sentence.
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
The instant appeal is against the Judgment of conviction dated 28.02.1994 and Order of sentence dated 02.03.1994 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribag in Sessions Trial No.13/1988, whereby and whereunder, the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 302/34 and Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and directed to undergo imprisonment for life for the commission of offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
2. The prosecution story in brief as per the fardbeyan of one Janardan Kumar Thakur, the informant (P.W.10) is that on 25.11.1986 at about 5:30 p.m., the informant along with his brother Birendra Kumar Thakur (deceased) was coming back having watching a football match from Barkakana Football Ground to his house in village Hehal. In the way, villagers Mathura Singh, P.W.3 and Dewana Kumhar @ Deo Nandan Prajapati, P.W.1 also happened to be with them. It has been stated that at about 6:30 p.m., they reached near Nala of Naiya Ghutuwa Village. The informant was having a torch with two cells in his hand and his brother Birendra Kumar Thakur (deceased) had a torch with three cells and both were coming flashing torch light. It has further been stated that they went a bit ahead of the Nala, the informant found the accused persons, namely, Bhim Singh, Mahendra Singh, Umar Singh, Pavitra Singh, Ashok Singh, Jattu Singh and Doman Karmali and two more persons, namely, Lal Mohan Singh and Pawan Singh were sitting and hiding themselves in the ditch nearby.
It has been stated that as soon as the informant and his brother went ahead to the said accused persons, all of a sudden accused persons armed with bombs, pistol and chhura (dagger) surrounded Birendra Kumar Thakur, the deceased and started attacking him. It has further stated that being attacked with bombs, pistol and chhura, the deceased being injured fell down on the earth and died.
It is in this pretext, the allegation has been levelled that accused Jattu Singh, Ashok Singh and Doman Karmali were assaulting the informant’s brother with bomb and Bhim Singh, Umar Singh and Pavitra Singh were assaulting the deceased with chhura, while the accused Mahendra Singh, Lalmohan Singh (since dead) and Pawan Singh were attacking him with pistol.
It is further stated that the informant was flashing light with his torch and started making the noise and after hearing the alarm, the villagers rushed to the place of occurrence and saw the dead body.
It is further alleged that the informant recognized all the accused persons in the light of his torch and the Devana Kumhar and Mathura Singh who were accompanying had fled away after hearing the noise of bomb.
The informant on such occurrence has reported the same before the Police which was instituted as regular police case by instituting the case under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 302 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and thereafter, investigation was started.
The investigation after having been completed, the charge-sheet was submitted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and after cognizance having been taken, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. The case was transferred from the Court of Sessions for disposal and accordingly, the concerned Court has started trial and after examining all together 13 witnesses and on due consideration of the exhibits, the judgment of conviction has been passed, which is the subject matter of the instant appeal.
3. Mr. A.N. Deo, learned counsel appearing for the appellants has raised the following grounds in assailing the judgment of conviction and order of sentence:-
(ii) No case has been instituted under the Explosive Substance Act and the Arms Act, even though, there is specific allegation of explosion of bomb
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the testimony of witnesses, even if related to the deceased, should not be automatically discarded, and minor discrepancies in the evidence sh....
Conviction under IPC 302/34 upheld on reliable sole eyewitness testimony corroborated by medical evidence and witnesses, despite minor discrepancies and non-examination of investigating officer/docto....
The court established that the testimony of close relatives can be deemed credible and sufficient for conviction if it is consistent and corroborated by medical evidence, and that the burden of dispr....
The importance of credible eyewitness testimony, reliable and clinching evidence, and the exclusion of every possible hypothesis except guilt in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The testimony of an injured witness holds greater evidentiary value, and minor discrepancies in witness statements do not necessarily render the evidence untrustworthy.
The main legal point established is the significance of consistent eyewitness testimonies, supported by medical and forensic evidence, in establishing guilt. The judgment also clarifies that non-exam....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
