Sanatan Singh vs State Of Jharkhand

Ananda Sen, J

Appellants have preferred these appeals against the judgment of conviction dated 15th June, 2016 and order of sentence dated 17th June, 2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge VIII at East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No.404 of 2013 arising out of Bodam Police Station Case No.12 of 2013 [G.R. No. 1310 of 2013], whereby and whereunder, the appellants have been convicted for offences under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each and in case of default of payment of fine, sentenced to undergo further imprisonment for six months.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellants argued that if the evidence of the informant and other witnesses is scrutinized properly, it would be clear that they had not seen the occurrence. They are imposing themselves to be eye witnesses, which actually, they are not. He further contended that the distance between the house of the informant and the place of occurrence is such that it cannot be said that the informant could have reached the place of occurrence, on hearing the alarm. He further argued that the Investigating Officer has not been examined in this case, which is fatal for prosecution and prejudicial to the defence. It is only the Investigating Officer, who could have actually stated the distance of the place of occurrence from the house of the informant. If the statement of P.W.1 is scrutinized, it would be clear that at the night information was given to the police station, but the said information was not brought before the Court and due to non-examination of the investigating officer, what was the information given at night could not be verified. Since the proper information was given at night, present First Information Report is hit by Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Even the blood stained weapon was not seized by the investigating officer. Learned counsel further argued that the P.W.2, who was accompanying the deceased, stated that he was also assaulted, but, there is nothing to suggest that there was any injury as his injury report was not produced. From the aforesaid fact, it cannot be said that the P.W.2 is an injured witness. He also argued that all the witnesses are related witnesses. He further contended that from the evidence, it is clear that there was dispute between the parties, thus, there is every chance of false implication. Further, from the evidence of the doctor, it is clear that only one blow was given, which would suggest that the case would not fall within the ambit of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, rather at best, this case can be one under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer of the appellants and argued that P.W.2 was accompanying the deceased and his version cannot be doubted. He further contended that the informant had seen the assault as his house is next to the place of occurrence. He argued that non-examination of the investigating officer is not fatal in this case as no prejudice is shown by the defence. He contended that enmity cuts both ways and  the  prosecution  has  been  able  to  prove  that  this  deceased  was threatened by the appellants and they were asked to leave the land, which would suggest that only these appellants have committed the murder. He also argued that the ocular evidence matches with the medical evidence, thus, both these appeals need to be dismissed.

The prosecution case is based on the fardbeyan of the informant Ramu Ghosh, recorded by the SI Anil Murmu on 21.04.2013 at about 10.20 am at MGM Hospital, Jamshedpur, wherein it has been alleged that on 20.04.2013 at about 10.00 p.m., father of the informant and his uncle Lakhi Kant Makur were going to their house from Dimna Chowk on bicycle. When they reached near Mirjadihmore, Kalimandir, appellant Santan Singh, appellant Khetu Ram Kisku and Yogendra Kisku, Kala Lohar, Ravi Kumar Bahadur and Lakhi Ram Singh surrounded them. Appellant Sanatan Singh suddenly assaulted the father of the informant with farsha (sharp weapon) with an intention to kill him. It is alleged that when the father of the informant and his uncle raised alarm, informant, whose house is situated near Mirjadihmore, reached there and saw that the accused Yogendra Kisku, Kala Lohar, Ravi Kumar Bahadur and Lakhi Ram Singh had surrounded the father of the informant while appellant Khetu Ram with lathi was assaulting the father of the informant on his face indiscriminately. It is further narrated in the fardbeyan that appellant Sanatan Singh was telling the deceased to vacate the government land or else to pay Rs.50,000/- to the accused, which is by way of extortion. It is further narrated in the fardbeyan that the appellant Sanatan and Khetu continued to assault the father of the informant even after he fell unconscious. On hulla, when villagers started gathering there, the accused persons fled away. The informant further narrated that the appellant Sanatan Singh, Kisku Ram Khetu and the accused Yogendra Kisku, Kala Lohar, Ravi Kumar Bahadur and Lakhi Ram Singh had formed a group. They were illegally encroaching and selling the government lands. It is further alleged by the informant that a meeting of villagers was held on 14.04.2013 wherein the villagers had objected against the accused persons. He further narrated that since the father of the informant was in possession of some government land and accused persons in order to grab the same, have committed murder of the deceased. The informant stated that the deceased died while being taken to MGM Hospital.

On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant, Bodam Police Station Case No.12 of 2013 was registered for offences under Sections 386, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Police, after completion of investigation, submitted charge sheet against the appellants for offences under Sections 387, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Cognizance of the offence was taken and the case was committed for trial. Charges with two heads were framed against the appellants for offence under Sections 302/149 and 386/149 of the Indian Penal Code, which was read over and explained to the appellants. Since the appellants pleaded not guilty, they were put on trial.

To bring home the charge against the appellants, the prosecution had examined 6 (six) witnesses, namely P.W.1 Ramu Ghosh (informant), P.W.2 Lakhi Lal Makur, P.W.3 Dilip Ghosh, P.W.4 Dr. J.S. Rao, P.W.5 Sumir Dandapat, and P.W.6 Vikash Dandpat.

The prosecution also produced following documents to substantiate its case, which were marked exhibits:-

Exhibit 1

Fardbeyan

Mark ‘X’

Photocopy of Inquest Report

Exhibit 2

Postmortem Report alongwith signature of Dr. J.S. Rao

After closure of prosecution evidence, the statements of the appellants were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C wherein they claimed to be innocent. Appellants in their defence had not taken any ground during their examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and no evidence has been adduced by them in defence.

The Trial Court, after hearing the arguments and appreciating the evidences on record, by the judgment of conviction dated 15th June, 2016 and order of sentence dated 17th June, 2016 passed in Sessions Trial No. 404 of 2013, has convicted and sentenced the appellants for offences under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

In this case we find that altogether 6 (six) witnesses were examined by the prosecution. This is a case where the allegation is that the appellants and others had committed murder of the deceased.

P.W.1 Ramu Ghosh is the informant. It is his father, who has been killed. He in his deposition stated that the deceased (his father) and his uncle (P.W.2) were returning to home from Dimna Chowk. When they reached near Kitadih Kali Mandir, appellants Sanatan Singh, Khetu Kisku and others namely Ravi Kumar, Lakhi Ram and Kala Lohar surrounded them. Santan assaulted the deceased with farsha due to which he fell down. Thereafter Khetu Kisku assaulted on his face with danda. Others had surrounded his father and were saying to leave the government land or else he would have to pay Rs.50 lakh. He stated that a panchayati was held in the village. This witness further stated that he had reached to the place of occurrence, hearing the alarm of his uncle (P.W.2). He saw that accused were assaulting the deceased. When many persons gathered there, the accused persons fled from the place. He took the deceased to MGM Hospital, where the doctors declared him dead. He proved his fardbeyan, which was marked Exhibit 1 and he also proved the inquest report, which was marked as ‘X’.

P.W.2 Lakhi Ram Makur is the brother of the deceased, who was accompanying him. He stated that on way to home from Dimna Road, when they reached Mirjadih More, appellants Sanatan Singh, Khetu Ram Kisku, Kala Lohar, Lakhiram Singh and others, who he does not know, surrounded the deceased in front of Kali Mandir. Appellant Sanatan Singh assaulted the deceased with a pharsha on his head due to which he fell down. Thereafter Khetu Ram Kisku was assaulting the deceased with lathi indiscriminately. On this he raised alarm, hearing which the informant (P.W.1), Dilip Ghosh and 2/3 persons rushed there. He stated that they had assaulted the deceased due to land dispute. Appellants Sanatan and Khetu Ram Kisku were saying to leave the land or pay Rs.50,000/- as extortion. He stated that a meeting of the villagers was called on 14.04.2013. Accused persons in the meeting said that they will show paper of the land and could not show the papers. Thereafter on 20.04.2013 they assaulted. After the assault, the deceased was taken to the MGM Police Station where they adviced to take him to MGM Hospital and when the deceased was taken to MGM Hospital, he was declared dead.

P.W.3 Dilip Ghosh has stated that on the date of occurrence he was at his in-laws house at Mirjadih. On hearing alarm, when he reached the place of occurrence, he saw that the deceased (his father-in-law) was being assaulted by Sanatan Singh, Khetu Ram Kisku, Kala Lohar, Ravi Thapa and Lakhi Ram Singh. Sanatan was having a pharsa in his hand, Lakhi was having Danda. He stated that when they reached, those persons fled.  Thereafter deceased was taken to the Police Station from where he was taken to MGM Hospital and on way to the hospital the deceased died.

P.W.4 Dr. J.S. Rao is the doctor, who had conducted postmortem examination on the dead body of the deceased. He found the following injuries: -

External (1) Lacerated wound 6 cm x ½ cm x bone surface deep over left side of the forehead and head extending upto 2 cm above left eyebrow.

(2) Contusion swelling 15 cm x 13 cm over left side of the face.

(3) Laceration 4 cm x 1 ½ cm x bone deep over lower part of the face below lower lip over lower jaw

(4) Contusion swelling 12 cm x 11 cm over right side of the face

Internal Injuries

(i) Contusion laceration of left frontal scalp (ii) Diffused contusion of the whole brain

(iii) Contusion of right and left side facial muscles

(iv) Fracture right and left side facial bones including upper and lower jaw bones.

(5) Laceration of soft tissue of oral cavity & displacement of teeth

Opinion

(i) Injuries noted above were antimortem and caused by hard & blunt object

(ii) Death was due to head and facial injuries.

(iii) Time since death – 12 Hrs. to 18 Hrs. (approx) from the time of PM examination.

The doctor also stated that the injuries were sufficient to cause the death of the deceased in ordinary course of nature.

The postmortem report was marked as Exhibit 2.

P.W. 5 Sumir Dandapet has stated that he had been to the house of the deceased, who is his maternal uncle. On hearing alarm Bachao Bachao, when he reached in front of Sirjadih More Kali Mandir, he saw that appellant Sanatan Singh, Jogen Kisku, Khetu Kisku, in total 5-6 persons were assaulting the deceased and Lakhi. Appellant Sanatan Singh assaulted the deceased with pharsa. Khetu Kisku was assaulting Lakhi kant Mahto with danda. Appellant Sanatan Singh was saying to leave the government land or pay Rs.50,000/- as extortion. In the meantime, the villagers gathered there whereafter the accused fled. He stated that deceased was taken to the police station and from there he was taken to MGM Hospital. On way to hospital, the deceased died.

P.W.6 Vikash Dandpad has stated that he was at the house of the deceased, who is his maternal uncle on the date of occurrence. On hearing alarm, when he went near the Mirjadih Kali Mandir, he saw that appellants Sanatan Singh, Khetu Ram Kisku, Yogendra Kisku, Kala Lohar, Ravi Kumar Bahadur, Lakhiram Singh had surrounded Lakhikant Makur and the deceased. Sanatan was having pharsa in his hand. He assaulted with that on the head of the deceased. Kheturam Kisku with danda assaulted on the face of the deceased indiscriminately. Appellant Sanatan was saying to leave the government land or to pay Rs.50,000/- as extortion. Deceased went unconscious. Deceased died on way while being taken to MGM Hospital.

Admittedly, the Investigating Officer has not been examined in this case. However, from the evidence we find that the ocular evidence matches with the medical evidence, inasmuch as the witnesses have stated the manner of assault and the doctor who had conducted the postmortem examination had found the injuries matching to the manner of assault. Defence has failed to elicit any contradiction in the cross-examination of the witnesses, so as to claim prejudice on account of non-examination of the Investigating Officer.

From the evidence, we find that the presence of these appellants at the place of occurrence has been proved. Witnesses have clearly stated that the appellants have assaulted the deceased. P.W.1 and P.W.3 have stated that the appellant Sanatan Singh assaulted the deceased with Pharsha and there is also evidence that appellant Khetu mercilessly assaulted the deceased on his face with stick. Medical evidence also corroborates the same as the doctor found injuries on the head and face, which has been discussed in the foregoing paragraphs. Eye witnesses have also stated that the assault was on the face and head. There is nothing in the cross examination of these witnesses, which can remotely suggest that they are not reliable witnesses. P.W.2 was the person, who was accompanying the deceased, when he was attacked and assaulted. His presence also cannot be doubted. We, thus, find that the prosecution has been able to prove the charges against the appellants beyond all reasonable doubt and has, thus, rightly convicted and sentenced the appellants for the offences under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. We find no merit in these appeals, calling for any interference by this Court with the judgment of conviction dated 15th June, 2016 and order of sentence dated 17th June, 2016 passed in Sessions Trial No.404 of 2013.

Both these appeals are, accordingly, dismissed. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Appellants in both these appeals are directed to serve the sentence in terms of the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. Appellant, Khetu Ram Kisku [Cr. Appeal (DB) No.831 of 2016], is on bail. His bail is cancelled. He is directed to surrender before the Court below forthwith to serve the sentence.

Let the Trial Court Records be sent back to the Court concerned forthwith along with a copy of this judgment.