Arjun Linda vs State Of Jharkhand

Shree Chandrashekhar,J

The sole appellant has suffered conviction and sentence of R.I. for life and fine of Rs. 10,000/- under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

The appellant has been acquitted of the charge under section 324 and section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

Ratan Ekka is the informant in this case. In his fardbeyan he has stated that on 28.2.2009, at about 10 a.m. he along with Mannu Tigga, Jitendra

Linda, Prashant Kachhap and Manish Oraon was engaged in preparation for a group marriage which was organized by Sarna Sabha. After the

ceremony, they were sleeping there. Binod Kachap and Rajan Oraon had gone for sleep on the stage. At about 2:30 a.m. in the night, Arjun Linda

came there and started assaulting Binod Kachhap and Rajan Oraon with iron channel used for moving a generator. On hearing sound, they woke up

and saw Arjun Linda assaulting both of them indiscriminately. Due to the injuries suffered by Rajan Oraon on his head and face he died on the spot

and the injured Binod Kachhap was taken for treatment to RIMS, Ranchi.

On the basis of his fardbeyan, Dhurwa P.S. case no. 40 of 2009 was registered against the appellant. During the trial the prosecution has examined

17 witnesses. The informant is PW-1 and the Investigating Officer has been examined as PW-17. The Investigating Officer has inspected the place

of occurrence, prepared the inquest report and recorded statement of the witnesses. He has recovered an iron angle of the size of 6.5†x 3†, both

ends angled and prepared seizure memo in presence of Sunil Toppo and Shani Tigga.

The prosecution has projected Ratan Ekka PW-1, Manu Tigga PW-2, Jitendra Linda PW-3, Manish Oraon PW-4 and Prashant Kachhap PW-12 as

the eye witnesses.

The informant has deposed in the court that he has seen the appellant assaulting Rajan Oraon and Binod Kachhap with a rod which is used for

moving generator. Rajan Oraon has suffered head injury and the appellant has assaulted Binod Kachhap on his face which has broken his jaw. He has

stated that within half an hour of the incident, the police arrived at the place of occurrence. He has proved his signature on the fardbeyan which was

recorded by the police at the place of occurrence. PW-2, PW-3, PW-4 and PW-12, who were sleeping with the informant in the intervening night of

27/28th February, 2009, have seen the appellant assaulting Binod Kachhap and Rajan Oraon. They have stated that they were sleeping near the stage

which was prepared for a group marriage organized by Sarna Sabha.

During their cross-examination, PW-1, PW-2, PW-3, PW-4 and PW-12 have remained firm and they have reiterated their statement in their

examination-in-chief. Nothing material could be elicited by the defence during their cross-examination. Through their evidence the prosecution has

proved assault by the appellant on Rajan Oraon.

The ocular evidence is corroborated by the medical evidence laid through Dr. Manoj Kumar Korah-PW-13 who has conducted the post-mortem

examination on 28.2.2009 at about 10:45 a.m. He has found the following injuries:

(i) Seven abrasions viz of size 2 c.m. x ½ c.m. on right lateral neck upper part of size 2 c.m. x1 c.m. on front of right shoulder, size 6 c.m. x

1 c.m. on back of right shoulder, fourth and fifth of size of 4 c.m. x 2 c.m. and of size 1 c.m. x ½ c.m. on front of right knee joint and sixth

of size 4 c.m. x 2 c.m. on front of right leg middle part and seventh size 5 c.m. x 2 c.m. on front of right foot.

(ii) Three lacerated wounds viz first of size 8 c.m. bone deep on front of right forehead, second of size 12 c.m. x 1 c.m. x bone deep at left

parieto frontal adjoin left orbital region and third of size 6 c.m. x 2 c.m.x bone deep on front of right leg upper part with fracture of right

tibia fibula bone.

According to the doctor, injuries found on Rajan Oraon were ante-mortem in nature and caused within 3 to 24 hours of the post-mortem

examination. According to the prosecution, Rajan Oraon has died between 2:30 a.m. - 3:00 a.m. in the night of 27/28th February, 2009. The fardbeyan

of the informant was recorded at about 4 a.m. and the doctor has conducted the post-mortem examination at 10:45 a.m. on the same day. These

contemporaneous documents which were prepared on the events which have taken place in quick succession would rule out false implication of the

appellant in the case after deliberation.

The seizure and the inquest witnesses have duly proved the seizure memo and inquest report. Other prosecution witnesses are not the eye

witnesses, but they have also supported the prosecution’s case on other material aspects of the case.

From the aforesaid evidences led by the prosecution, it is proved that the appellant has assaulted Rajan Oraon with hard and blunt substance. In

view of the consistent and cogent evidence of PW-1,PW-2,PW-3,PW-4 and PW-12, non-examination of Binod Kachhap who has also suffered

injuries in the same incidence would not create doubt on involvement of the appellant in the occurrence.

On the basis of the above evidences, Mr. R.P.Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant at best can be

convicted and sentence under section 304 Part- I of the Indian Penal Code.

Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code makes culpable homicide murder if the act by which death has been caused falls under any one of the four

clauses, except in the cases falling under any one of the five exceptions. The cases falling under the exceptions under section 300 IPC are made

punishable under section 304 IPC. The evidences led by the prosecution against the appellant would disclose that the appellant is not entitled for the

benefit under Exception-4 to Section 300 IPC.

In “Surinder Kumar Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh†(1989) 2 SCC 217, the Supreme Court has indicated the situations under which an

accused may be extended benefit of Exception-4 to section 300 IPC, thus;

“To invoke this exception four requirements must be satisfied, namely, (i) it was a sudden fight; (ii) there was no premeditation; (iii) the

act was done in a heat of passion; and (iv) the assailant has not taken any undue advantage or acted in a cruel manner. The cause of the

quarrel is not relevant nor is it relevant who offered the provocation or started the assault. The number of wounds caused during the

occurrence is not a decisive factor but what is important is that the occurrence must have acted in a fit of anger. Of course, the offender

must not have taken any undue advantage or acted in a cruel manner. Where, on a sudden quarrel, a person in the heat of the moment

picks up a weapon which is handy and causes injuries, one of which proves fatal, he would be entitled to the benefit of this exception

provided he has not acted cruelly.............................â€​

It is the prosecution’s evidence that the appellant came in the night of 27/28th February. 2009 and assaulted Rajan Oraon and Binod Kachhap

indiscriminately. Rajan Oraon has suffered seven abrasions and three lacerated wounds. The lacerated wounds were caused on the front side of right

forehead and frontal parietal region adjoining left orbital region of Rajan Oraon. Size of both lacerated wounds were “8 c.m. x 1 c.m.†and “12

c.m. x 1 c.m.â€, bone deep. The 3rd lacerated wound has been found on upper part of right leg of Rajan Oraon and it has resulted in fracture of right

tibia fibula bone. The doctor has rendered a definite opinion that the death has been caused due to head injuries. In view of the number of injuries

caused to Rajan Oraon and the manner of occurrence as established by the prosecution, we are of the opinion that it was not in the heat of passion

upon a sudden quarrel that the appellant has assaulted Rajan Oraon which has resulted into his death. The injuries caused to Rajan Oraon would

reflect intention of the appellant. On such evidence, the appellant must be imputed with the knowledge that his act was so eminently dangerous that in

all probability it would cause death or such bodily injury as was likely to cause death and, therefore, he has committed murder of Rajan Oraon.

In view of the aforesaid discussions, finding no merit in this criminal appeal, Criminal Appeal (DB) no. 561 of 2014 stands dismissed.

Let lower court records be transmitted to the court concerned, forthwith.