Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Giris Manjhi – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. decision to limit the appeal to living appellants and procedural updates. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. incident description leading to the fir regarding assault and murder. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. (Para 20 , 21) |
| 4. assessment of witness testimonies and their implications. (Para 26 , 27 , 29) |
| 5. ultimately the court concluded to acquit appellants from severe charges and found them guilty of lesser offence. (Para 32) |
JUDGMENT :
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.
1. Heard Mr. Shubham Sinha, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellants and Mrs. Vandana Bharti, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. It is here to be mentioned at the very outset that during pendency of this criminal appeal, appellant no. 1 namely, Munshi Manjhi has died and vide order dated 22.04.2025, the appeal on behalf of appellant no. 1 Munshi Manjhi was abated. Now, the appeal is being heard only on behalf of alive appellants namely, appellant no. 2 Giris Manjhi (who is now re- numbered as appellant no. 1) and appellant no. 3 Wakil Manjhi (who is now re-numbered as appellant no. 2).
3. The instant criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellants against judgment of conviction and sentence dated 23.11.2002 passed by learned Additiona
Conviction under severe charges was overturned due to lack of evidence supporting unlawful assembly; appellants found guilty of lesser offences.
The court upheld the convictions under sections 147, 148, and 324 IPC, affirming that eyewitness and medical testimonies established the involvement of the appellants in the unlawful assembly and ass....
The court upheld the conviction under Section 307 IPC, establishing that the appellants had the intention to commit murder based on the evidence of eye witnesses and the nature of the assault.
The evidence must establish a premeditated intent to commit murder and the existence of an unlawful assembly with the common object of committing murder to support a conviction for murder under Secti....
Violation of procedural rules in SC & ST Act investigations vitiates trial outcomes; the conviction under lesser charges can be maintained despite initial assault intensity.
For a murder conviction, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the death was homicidal, which involves establishing the causal connection to the accused, a requirement not met in th....
The court clarified that mere participation in an assault does not equate to intent to kill, necessitating clear evidence of a common object for murder to uphold convictions under Section 302.
The prosecution failed to prove the charges of attempted murder and grievous hurt due to lack of evidence regarding intent and the nature of injuries.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
