IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, SUBHASH CHAND, JJ
Vijay Pandit, son of Somari Pandit – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 540 of 2013 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 429 of 2012, Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 473 of 2012, Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 774 of 2012, Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 815 of 2012
Decided on : 20-04-2023
The case involved the admissibility of confessional statements made by the accused persons under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. The court found that the confessions were made voluntarily and without any pressure, and therefore admissible as evidence. The court also considered the lack of evidence to support the defense's claim of police torture and the retraction of confessions by the accused. The court affirmed the conviction of some appellants but acquitted others due to lack of corroborative evidence.
JUDGMENT :
Subhash Chand, J.
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 540 of 2023 is preferred on behalf of the appellants Vijay Pandit, Rajesh Pandit, Sarita Devi, Sita Ram Pandit, Bhagirath Pandit and Indra Devi, Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 429 of 2012 is preferred on behalf of appellant Nathan Turiya, Cr. appeal (D.B.) No. 473 of 2012 is preferred on behalf of the appellant Ramdeo Pandey, Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 815 of 2012 is preferred on behalf of the appellant Santoshi Kumari against the judgment of conviction dated 14.03.2012 and sentence dated 16.03.2012 whereby the appellants/convicts were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/- for having committed the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine to undergo R.I. for two years, to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine (individually) of Rs.3,000/- for having committed offence punishable under Sections 364/34 of the I.P.C. and in default of payment of fine to undergo R.I. for two years and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay (individually) a fine of Rs. 1,000/- for having committed offence under Section 201/34 and in default of payment of fine to undergo R.I. for one year.
2. Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 774 of 2012 is on behalf of appellant State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner, Koderma against all the nine convicts aggrieved from the judgment of conviction dated 14.03.2012 and order of sentence dated 16.03.2012 passed by the court-below with the prayer to enhance the sentence of life imprisonment into the capital punishment.
3. All these appeals are against the common judgment of conviction and sentence which relates to the same case crime number (Markacho P.S. Case No. 27 of 2010). Therefore, all these appeals are decided with the common order.
4. The brief facts of the prosecution case leading to all these Cr. Appeals are that the informant Ishwar Sao @ Munshi Sao gave the written information with the Police Station Markacho, District Koderma with these allegations that on 20.03.2010 when he had gone to his crusher situated at Karmatarn his wife told over the phone to him that his younger son Aman Kumar was missing and despite search no whereabouts of him was known. Having received this information he came to his house immediately and made hectic search every possible place of his son. It was 11:30 of day time his wife had told him that his son was missing since 10 O’clock. In this regard, he gave the missing report with the Police Station concerned of his son at 7 O’clock in the evening which was registered in General Diary at number 232/10 dated 20.03.2010. On 21.03.2010 he received a letter lying on the window of his old house in which a ransom of Rs. 90,000/- was demanded and it was also stated that if the information of the same was given to the Police Station, prepare the dire consequences of the same. Keeping in mind the life of his son, he did not inform in regard to that letter to the police station concerned. Again on 22nd March, 2010 another letter was issued in which it was stated to hand over the ransom immediately. On 24th March 2010 the police had called the sniffer-dog to make search of his son. After some hours the people of the village raised alarm that under the mango tree of Bhagirth and others something was kept in a gunny bag which was emitting foul smell. This mango tree was adjoining to the Bhagtin Mandap. In presence of the persons of the village, the gunny bag was opened and dead body of his son Aman was found. It appeared that some chemical had been sprinkled on the body. The hair of the forehead was shaved. There was also a wound below the left ear. Police also came there. Police made investigation but no whereabouts of the accused was known.
This written information was given against the unknown persons with the suspicion that the criminals were of Bhagtin Mandap or of nearby place who had kidnapped his son and committed murder of him and th
Atbir vrs. Govt. of (NCT) of Delhi 2010(9) SCC 1
Ajitsingh Harnamsingh Gujral vrs. State of Maharastra 2011 (14) SCC 401
Bodh Raj @ Bodha And Ors. vs. Jammu and Kashmir
HENRY WESTMULLER ROBERTS VS. State of Assam 1985(3) SCC 291
Jagish vrs. State of M.P. 2009(9) SCC 495
Machhi Singh Vrs. State of Punjab (1983) 3 SCC 470
M.A.Antony @ Antappan vs. State of Kerala AIR 2009 SC 2549
Sankaria vrs. State of Rajasthan 1978(3) S.C.C. 435
Sushil Murmu vrs. State of Jharkhand
Shiv Shankar Singh vrs. State of Jharkhand” 2011(3) SCC 654
Sunder Singh @ Sunderrajan vrs. State of Uttranchal (2010) 10 SCC 611.
Confessions made voluntarily and without pressure under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. are admissible as evidence.
In child murder via circumstantial evidence, conviction upheld on last seen (digital media), disclosures to bones/slab recoveries; death commuted to natural life as State failed to prove no reformati....
The judgment establishes that a conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence requires a complete chain of evidence linking the accused to the crime, and that confessions made to police officers....
The court emphasized that eyewitness testimony, even from relatives, must be thoroughly examined without automatic dismissal, impacting convictions and resultant penalties in murder cases related to ....
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.