IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Ananda Sen, Subhash Chand, JJ.
Rajiv Singh Munda and ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 268 of 2014
Decided On : 08-05-2024
(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 148, 302/149, 201/149 - Conviction and sentence - Appellants convicted for rioting and murder - Evidence of eyewitnesses found unreliable and contradictory - Prosecution failed to prove case beyond reasonable doubt - Judgment of conviction set aside. (Paras 30, 29)
(B) Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 27 - Confessional statement leading to recovery - Not proved as contents of confession not established - Recovery of dead body not admissible. (Paras 23.3, 24)
Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted for rioting and murder following an incident during a marriage party where the deceased was allegedly assaulted. The prosecution's case relied on eyewitness testimony and confessions. However, significant doubts arose regarding the reliability of the evidence presented.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the appellants beyond a reasonable doubt, leading to the conclusion that the conviction was unjustified.
Issues: The main issues included the credibility of eyewitnesses and the admissibility of confessional statements leading to the recovery of the deceased's body.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the prosecution's evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction, emphasizing the need for reliable and corroborated testimony in criminal cases.
Result: Criminal appeal allowed; conviction and sentence set aside.
JUDGMENT :
Subhash Chand, J.
The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction dated 20.02.2014 and order of sentence dated 24.02.2014 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 752 of 2011/753 of 2011, whereby the appellants have been convicted for offence punishable under section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo RI for three years and for the offence under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code the appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.20,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment of six months and also for the offence under section 201/149 of the Indian Penal Code, the appellants have been sentenced for three years imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, they will also suffer simple imprisonment for three months.
2. The brief facts leading to this criminal appeal are that on 14th May, 2011 the informant namely, Kishnu Mahto had given the written information with the police station concerned Silli (Ranchi), with these allegations that on 14th May, 2011, he along with his elder brother Vishnu Mahto had left the house from Bundu to attend a marriage party at village Banta in house of Kartik Koiri. In the marriage ceremony the singing and dancing was going on. At 12 O'Clock in the night a dispute arose between the two sides of marriage party. His elder brother Vishnu Mahto intervened and pacified the dispute. After some time at 12:15, Rajan Singh Munda of village Banta along with his brother Rajiv Singh Munda and four to five aide armed with weapons came and Rajan Singh Munda assaulted to Vishnu Mahto with the sword while Rajiv Singh Munda assaulted with farsa and his brother was cut brutally. In the stampede, all the persons began to flee away. He also fled away in order to save himself. Later on, he came to know that his brother was murdered and deadbody was thrown away somewhere else in order to save themselves from the punishment of murder.
3. On this written information, Silli P.S. Case Crime No. 80 of 2011 was registered against the accused Rajan Singh Munda, Rajiv Singh Munda and four to five unknown persons under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 324, 325, 326, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The investigating officer conducted the investigation and filed charge-sheet against the accused Rajendra Singh Munda and Gandho Singh Munda, Rajiv Singh Munda, Rudru Singh Munda and Jitan Singh Munda for the offence under sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 324, 325, 326, 302 and 201 of IPC to the Court of Magistrate concerned who took the cognizance on the charge-sheet and committed the case for trial to the Court of the learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi who further transferred the same for trial to the Court of learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-III, Ranchi.
4. The Trial Court framed charge against all the five accused for the offence under Section 147, 148, 149, 302 and 201 of IPC and the same was read over and explained to all the accused persons who denied the charge and claimed to face the trial.
5. On behalf of prosecution in oral evidence examined 13 witnesses: PW1- Mantu Koiri, PW2- Kartik Koiri, PW3- Nabakunj Koiri, PW4-Machhindra Mahto, PW5- Dirpu Mahto, PW6- Brajeshwar Mahto, PW7-Kishnu Mahto (informant), PW8- Santosh Kumar Gupta, PW9-Sanjay Gupta, PW-10-Bhajan Baraik, PW-11-Mohan Kumhar, PW12-Kaushalendra Kumar Jha, investigating officer and PW-13, Dr. Samrina Kamal.
6. On behalf of the prosecution to prove the charge against the accused in documentary evidence adduced Exhibit-1 fardbeyan, Exhibit-2 to 2/5 seizure list, Exhibit-3 endorsement on written report, Exhibit-4 Formal FIR, Exhibit-5 seizure list of Relaxo slipper (chappal), Exhibit-5/1 seizure of blood stained soil, Exhibit-5/2 seizure of 2 lt. Kerosine oil in a plastic container, Exhibit-6 Confessional statement of Rajendra Singh Mund
The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the reversal of the conviction.
Prosecution has failed to prove charges levelled against accused persons under Sections 302/34, 201 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act by any reliable, cogent and independent evidence to hilt beyond reas....
Conviction based solely on testimonies of related witnesses is unsafe without independent corroboration, as evidenced by inconsistencies and lack of physical evidence.
Conviction for mass murder under 302/149 IPC set aside due to unreliable, contradictory ocular evidence from related witnesses; doubtful night identification, improbable presence/story; benefit of do....
Point of Law : A wife, who has seen an assailant giving fatal blows with a stick to her husband, would name the assailant to all present and to the police at an earliest opportunity.
The acquittal of the accused was based on the prosecution's failure to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt amidst significant inconsistencies in eyewitness testimonies.
A conviction for murder can be established on the basis of a credible solitary eyewitness, while absence of direct involvement leads to acquittal of another accused.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder based on consistent eyewitness testimony and corroborative medical evidence, establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
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.