IMPORTANT POINT
[The judgment establishes that in criminal cases, particularly those involving serious charges like murder, the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and any significant doubts regarding the credibility of eyewitnesses can lead to acquittal.]

JUDGMENT :

Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.

1. Heard Mr. Peeyush Krishna Choudhary, learned amicus curiae appearing for the appellant and Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned A.P.P.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 04.07.1995 (sentence passed on 05.07.1995) passed by Shri Rameshwar Prasad Verma, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gumla in S.T. No. 101 of 1991, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to imprisonment for life.

3. The prosecution case arises out of the fardbeyan of Sunil Kumar Sinha recorded on 19.12.1990 wherein it has been stated that on 18.12.1990 at about 7:00PM, his father Hemant Kumar Sinha had gone to purchase clothes at Khadi Gram Udyog situated at Shankh More. When the father of the informant did not return till 08:30PM, the informant and his younger brother Anil Kumar Sinha and their servant Birsu Munda went in search of his father towards Shankh More and when they reached near the turning at Mission More, they heard some commotion near the field and in the torchlight he saw 3-4 persons pinning down another person with one of the persons identified as Lamboo (appellant) assaulting the person lying on the ground with a bhujali with the aunt of the informant standing nearby exhorting the other persons to do away with the life of the person lying in the field. The informant could understand that it was his father who was being assaulted at which he immediately returned back to his village and informed about the matter to Manmohan Prasad, Surendra Prasad, Madhu Korva, Chotan Munda, Kishore Beck and others and all of them went to the place of occurrence where none of the miscreants could be found but the person who was lying was identified as the father of the informant in a pool of blood with several injuries on his person and Khadi clothes, a torch and a plastic cap lying beside him. The reason for the occurrence is that about fifteen days back, there was an altercation between his father and Lamboo and Kusum Lata on account of illicit relationship between Lamboo and Kusum Lata, for which threats were extended to the father of the informant.

Based on the aforesaid allegations, Raidih P.S. Case No. 71/90 was instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 302/3109/120B IPC against Kusum Lata, Lamboo and 3-4 unknown persons. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against Kusum Lata, Lamboo and Md. Kalam and after cognizance was taken, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions where it was registered as Sessions Trial No. 101 of 1991. Charge was framed against the accused persons under Section 302/34 IPC and the accused Kusum Lata was further charged under Section 302/109 IPC which was read over and explained to the accused in Hindi to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. The prosecution has examined as many as nineteen (19) witnesses in support of its case.

P.W.1 Dr. Hemant Kumar was posted as a Civil Assistant Surgeon at Sadar Hospital, Gumla and on 20.12.1990 he had conducted autopsy on the dead body of Hemant Kumar Sinha and had found following injuries: -

(i) Incised wound chin and the face 5” x 1” x 1½” with cutting of mandible bone.

(ii) Incised wound chin of the face 5” x 1” x 1½” below injury no. 1

(iii) Incised wound on the vertex of head 4” x 3” x bone deep in the fracture of parietal bone brain matter congested blood clot present.

(iv) Incised wound vertex the head by the left side of injury no. 3 3” x 3/4 “ x bone deep with fracture of parietal bone. Brain matter congested blood clot present.

(v) Incised wound occipital region of the head 4” x 3/4” x bone deep with fracture of the occipital bone brain matter congested blood clot present.

(vi) Incised wound occipital region of the head below injury no. 5, 4” x 3/4” x 3” brain matter lacerated with fracture of bone and blood clot present.

(vii) Incised wound lower part of th