Prem Kumar Singh @ Baliram Singh And Ors vs State of Jharkhand

Shree Chandrashekhar, J

Both the appellants have challenged the judgment of conviction under section 302/34 IPC and section 323/34 IPC and the order of sentence of R.I. for life under section 302/34 and S.I. for three months under section 323/34 IPC, both dated 31.7.2001, passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge-, Seraikella in Sessions Trial No. 411 of 1997.

The prosecution's story is unfolded in the fardbeyan of Budhram Munda, son of the deceased, namely Mangal Singh Munda, recorded at about 10 p.m. in the night of 14.6.1997 at Seraikella Police Station. The informant has stated that on 14.6.1997, at about 6 a.m., he had gone to the fair. His cousin Dinda Munda, brother-in-law Guruwa Munda and his father Mangal Singh Munda started for Sankranti Mela and while returning from the fair when they reached near mango orchard situated near his village, the accused persons namely, Prem Kumar Singh and Matu Munda asked his father to hand over pork to them. At that time his brother Dinda Munda and his brother-in-law Guruwa Munda also were with his father. When his father refused to give pork to the accused persons, they started assaulting him with fist and legs on his face, chest and stomach. When his brother and brother-in-law tried to save his father, the accused persons assaulted them also. On the basis of fardbeyan of Budhram Munda, Kuchai P.S. Case No. 10 of 1997 was registered on 14.6.1997 against both the appellants under sections 302/34, 341/34 and 323/34 IPC. After the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused-appellants and they faced trial on the aforesaid charges for causing death of Mangal Singh Munda and causing hurt to Dinda Munda and Guruwa Munda. During the trial, the prosecution has examined six witnesses; Dr. Radhika Kumari Sinha-PW-5, who has conducted the post-mortem examination over the dead body of Mangal Singh Munda, has found the following injuries:

"1. Right upper tooth fallen on and found inside.

Lower Right incisor tooth found inside the mouth. Both have caused by hard and blunt object.

Scratch on the right arm 2" x1"

Left lateral side of abdomen swollen.

On dissection of abdomen, the abdomen was found full of blood and spleen was found raptured in the middle."

Section 320 of the Indian Penal Code defines grievous hurt. Clause Seventhly of Section 320 IPC provides that fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth would amount to grievous injury. The doctor has found two uprooted teeth of Mangal Singh Munda in his mouth. Spleen of Mangal Singh Munda was also found ruptured.

Thus, we find that Mangal Singh Munda has suffered grievous hurt.

Two witnesses-P.W.-2 and PW-4 are the eye witnesses. The manner of occurrence disclosed by the prosecution through evidence of PW-2 and PW-4 would reveal that assault upon Mangal Singh Munda was not premeditated. When he refused to part with pork, the appellants have assaulted him with fist and legs on his face, chest and stomach. It thus appears that assault upon Mangal Singh Munda was upon a sudden quarrel which was triggered when he refused the demand of the appellants, to part with pork which he has purchased in the market.

In the aforesaid state of evidences, we hold that the appellants had no intention to cause death of Mangal Singh Munda. This also cannot be inferred from the prosecution's evidence that they had the knowledge that their act in all probability would cause death of Mangal Singh Munda.

Accordingly, conviction of both the appellants under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and order of sentence of R.I. for life, both dated 31.7.2001, passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge-Seraikella in S.T. No. 411 of 1997 are set-aside.

Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code provides punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt. Both the appellants are convicted under section 325 r/w section 34 IPC and they are sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, to be paid to the wife of Mangal Singh Munda or to her legal heirs.

Conviction of both the appellants under section 323/34 IPC is affirmed.

Both the appellants, namely, Prem Kumar Singh and Matu Munda who have served sentence of more than 5 years upon deposit of fine of Rs. 5,000/- by each of them, shall be discharged of liability of the bail-bonds furnished by them.

In the result, criminal appeal (D.B.) No. 357 of 2001 is partly allowed.

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