The court determined that a single act in an altercation did not constitute murder, leading to a conviction of culpable homicide instead, emphasizing the necessity of intent and multiple injuries for a murder charge.

JUDGMENT :

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.

1. We have already heard the arguments of Mrs. Ragini Kumari, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. S.K. Srivastava, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The instant criminal appeal is preferred by above named sole appellant for setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 11.07.2018 and order of sentence dated 12.07.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Dumka in S.T. Case No.173 of 2012 arising out of Gopikandar P.S. Case No.31 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No.1450 of 2011, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been held guilty for the offences under sections 302 and 307 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life along with fine of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) for the offence under section 302 of IPC and R.I. for 7 years along with fine of Rs.1,000/-(One thousand) for the offence under section 307 of Indian Penal Code with default stipulation. Both the sentences are directed to run concurrently. Other co-accused persons, namely, Kollen Dehri, Budhini Maharani and Samanti Maharani have been extended benefit of doubt and acquitted from the charges under sections 302/34 and 307/34 of IPC.

Factual Matrix:-

3. The factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that on 14.11.2011 at about 10:00 pm, the accused person, Ram Lal Dehri (appellant) along with Kollen Dehri, Budhani Maharani and Samanti Maharani arrived at the house of the informant, Sundarmuni Maharani. It is alleged that Ram Lal Dehri(appellant) told the informant’s husband that your wife is searching another husband, which was protested by Surendra Dehri(since deceased) and there was exchange of hot words between both the parties. Meanwhile, Ram Lal Dehri gave lathi blow on the head of the informant’s husband causing injury on left side of the head with intention to kill him. Due to sustaining head injuries, the informant’s husband fell down and died on spot. It is further alleged that the informant rushed to rescue her husband, she was also assaulted by Ram Lal Dehri on her head with intention to kill her. She has also sustained fracture injury on head. The informant raised alarm “bachao-bachao” then her daughter Nilmuni Kumari (P.W.1) rushed and has seen the occurrence. It is further alleged that after hearing the screams of the informant, several villagers assembled at the place of occurrence, then the accused persons fled away.

4. On the basis of above information, FIR was registered for the offences under sections 302, 323, 307/34 of Indian Penal Code . After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted for the offences under sections 302, 323, 307, 109, 120-B/34 of Indian Penal Code . After taking cognizance, the case was committed to the court of Sessions and S.T. No.173 of 2012 was registered. The appellant has denied the charges leveled against him and claimed to be tried. After conclusion of the trial, the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence of the appellant was passed, which has been assailed in this appeal.

5. In course of trial, altogether 9 witnesses have been examined by the prosecution namely:-

P.W.1-Nilmuni Kumar(Daughter of the informant and deceased)

P.W.2-Dukhi Maharani

P.W.3-Nimita Kumari

P.W.4-Rubin Kisku

P.W.5-Yogesh Kisku @ Yogendra

P.W.6-Harendra Dehir

P.W.7-Dr. Nishit Kumar Jha

P.W.8-Sundarmuni Maharani(informant)

P.W.9-Baiju Baraik(Investigating Officer)

6. Apart from oral testimony of witnesses, following documentary evidence has been adduced:-

EXt.1-Memo of arrest of Budhni Devi

Ext.1/1-Memo of arrest of Samanti Maharani

Ext.2-Postmoretem report

Ext.3.-Signature of informant on fardbeyan

Ext.4-Fardbeyan

Ext.5.Inquest report

Ext.6.R