IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, SUBHASH CHAND, JJ.
Bistu Pasi son of Hari Pasi – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar (now Jharkhand) - Respondent
Cr. Appeal (DB) No.413 of 1994
Decided on : 27-02-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments from the appellant against the conviction (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. court's analysis and observations regarding evidence and reliability (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 4. court's decision based on earlier findings (Para 33) |
| 5. conclusion and order to quash the conviction (Para 34 , 35 , 36) |
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
The instant appeal is against the Judgment of conviction dated 11.05.1994 and Order of sentence dated 12.05.1994 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Deoghar in Sessions Case No.91 of 1991, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 3 02 and 307 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and Section 3 /4 of the Explosive Substance Act and directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the commission of offence under Section 3 02 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE .
2. The prosecution story in brief as per the fardbeyan of the Anandi Mahatha (informant) recorded by S.I., A.K. Dalmia of Deoghar P.S. at the emergency ward of Deoghar Hospital is that on 18.04.1990 at about 9:00 p.m., Anandi Mahatha P.W.5 (father of the deceased), his son Umesh Mahtha (deceased) along with other family members were sitting on the door of their house situated at mohallah Barmasia within the jurisdiction Deoghar Police Station. In the meantime, the accused Bistu Pasi and Budhan Pasi, both residents of the same mohallah, reached there from the northern side.
The accused Bistu Pasi started abusing the informant and asked him to come out. One Anil Pasi of his mohallah informed the informant that the accused Bistu Pasi was taking bomb. Hence, he advised the informant to go inside the house. The informant Anandi Mahtha started fleeing towards his house. In the meantime, the accused Bistu Pasi threw a bomb on his son Umesh Mahtha (deceased) who was also sitting near the door of the house. Accused Bistu Pasi, appellant herein, threw second bomb on the informant but it could not hit him as he succeeded to enter into his house. The bomb thrown by Bistu Pasi missed the target and hit the wall of the house. In the meanwhile, the area was filled with smoke. Accused Budhan Pasi who was also armed with bomb was making announcement that whoever would try to save the informant and his son, he would kill him.
According to the fardbeyan (Ext.4), when the informant-P.W.5 found that his son did not enter into the house, he opened the door and came out of the house and found his son Umesh Mahtha lying near the door of house with profuse bleeding having his skull badly damaged. He saw the accused Bistu Pasi and Budhan Pasi (absconder) moving with bombs in their hands. While the informant was pulling to take his injured son Umesh Mahtha inside the house, Bistu Pasi threw another bomb on him. However, the informant was saved since the bomb missed the target and hit wall of the house. Thereafter, the accused persons fled away, towards north side.
The motive behind the occurrence is said to be land dispute between both the parties and accused Bistu Pasi was cousin brother of the informant’s wife and wife of informant is living with her father and on the day of occurrence, accused Bistu Pasi threatened the deceased to fact the dire consequences.
On the basis of the fardbeyan, F.I.R. was instituted. The Police had conducted investigation and submitted charge-sheet against the accused persons including the appellant for the commission of offence under Sections 3 02 and 307 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and Section 3 /4 of the Explosive Substance Act before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial and the trial was commenced. Another accused person Budhan Pasi has been declared absconder and he had not been put on trial.
3. The prosecution altogether has examined 8 witnesses, basis upon which, the le
Ashok Debbarma @ Achak Debbarma Vrs. State of Tripura
C.B.I. Vrs. Ashok Kumar Aggarwal
Dalbir Singh Vrs. State of Punjab
Dalip Singh v. State of Punjab [AIR 1953 SC 364 : 1953 Cri LJ 1465]
Kulesh Mondal Vrs. State of W.B.
Mallanna and Ors. Vrs. State of Karnataka
Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan [1951 SCC 1213 : AIR 1952 SC 54 : 1952 Cri LJ 547]
Rang Bahadur Singh & Ors. Vrs. State of U.P.
Swamy Shraddananda v. State of Karnataka
Sheila Sebastian Vrs. R. Jawaharaj & Anr.
Sukhwant Singh v. State of Punjab [(1995) 3 SCC 367 : 1995 SCC(Cri) 524 : (1995) 2 Scale 482]
Tej Parkash v. State of Haryana [(1996) 7 SCC 322 : 1996 SCC(Cri) 412]
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts, emphasizing the importance of trustworthy evide....
The judgment establishes that minor discrepancies in witness testimonies, which do not materially affect the case, cannot be the basis for doubting the prosecution's case.
Conviction on sole eyewitness unreliable due to contradictions in assault manner/place, house layout inconsistency, suspicious family conduct; benefit of doubt where guilt not proved beyond reasonabl....
Point of law: Every person who witnesses a murder reacts in his own way. Some are stunned, become speechless and stand rooted to the spot. Some become hysteric and start wailing. Some start shouting ....
Conviction under Section 307 IPC requires clear proof of intent to kill; mere injuries or hostile testimony without corroborating evidence are insufficient for conviction.
Related witnesses' evidence can be relied upon if consistent and true, and the previous enmity can also be the motive behind the occurrence.
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.