AKOIJAM RANBIR SINGH Vs. GOVERNMENT OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Akoijam Ranbir Singh was tried by the Sessions Judge of Manipur for the alleged murder of Ibohal Singh. He was given the benefit of doubt and was acquitted on November 2, 1967. The State preferred an appeal, and the Judicial Commissioner of Manipur took a contrary view. He convicted him of the offence under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced him to imprisonment for life. Akoijam Ranbir Singh has therefore filed the present appeal.

(2.) The allegation against the appellant was this. Sanajoba Singh (P. W. 2) and Dorendro Singh (P. W. 3) were going on Paona Road in Imphal bazar on December 13, 1966, in the evening, when they met their friend Raghumani Singh (P. W. 4) near Pratap Talkies. All three of them went to Eikhoigo Hotel for tea. Thereafter, when they were standing outside, on the road, near the verandah of Bharat Shoe House, opposite Pratap Talkies, towards the west of a pan stall, the appellant came there with a friend at about 6.30 p.m. and stopped near the pan stall. He beckoned Sanajoba Singh (P. W. 2) and when Sanajoba Singh went near him, he asked him why he was gazing at him. There was an exchange of hot words between them, and the appellant and his friend gave fist blows to Sanajoba Singh on the face. Sanajoba Singh retreated. In the meantime, Ibohal Singh came out of the Bharat Shoe House and separated them. The appellant and his friend then went towards the south while Sanajoba Singh and his friends Dorendro Singh (P. W. 3) and Raghumani Singh (P. W. 4) went to Eikhoigi Hotel again for taking their bicycles. When they came out, they found Ibohal Singh standing in the verandah of Bharat Shoe House. Sanajoba Singh did not know Akoijam Ranbir Singh and asked Dorendro Singh and Raghumani Singh who his assailant was. They told him the appellant's name and said that they did no know the name of the assailant Dorendro Singh and Raghumani Singh then proceeded a bit ahead, while Sanajoba Singh went behind. When they were about to approach the lane running to the west of Paona Road, Sanajoba Singh heard a voice at a distance of some five or six feet, from behind, asking him to wait. Sanajoba Singh, Dorendro Singh and Raghumani Singh then stopped, and they saw the appellant coming alone, on foot. He asked Sanajoba Singh to "settle the matter", and Sanajoba Singh agreed to do so. The appellant then said that the matter might be settled at some other place, Ibohal Singh, who was still standing in the verandah asked Sanajoba Singh and the appellant to settle the matter there. Dorendro Singh and Raghumani Singh however went away leaving their friend Sanajoba Singh alone. Ibohal Singh asked the appellant and Sanajoba Singh to go away, but the appellant was unwilling, and there was an exchange of hot words between him and Ibohal Singh for two or three minutes. Sanajoba Singh was then standing at a distance of about 1 1/2 "fathoms" away on the footpath, near the verandah at a distance of about 2 1/2 feet from the appellant. The appellant took out a knife with a blade of about 5" from the pocket of his trousers and thrust it on the right side of Ibohal Singh's belly, Ibohal Singh stooped down a bit and cried "Thang" (dagger). The appellant then dealt a second blow. On the left side of Ibohal Singh rounded the pillar of the verandah and ran after the appellant. Sanajoba Singh (P. W. 2) also ran after the appellant but he made good his escape on his bicycle. Sanajoba Singh heard the cry "Ei Yadre" ("I collapse") from Ibohal Singh and saw him falling at a short distance from him. He saw Nimai Singh (P. W. 5) rushing to Ibohal Singh's help. Sanajoba Singh brought a rickshaw and he and Nimai Singh took Ibohal Singh, who had become unconscious, towards the hospital. All this is said to have happened at about dusk (about 7.30 p.m.). They reached the hospital shortly afterwards. Ibohal Singh was taken to the emergency room by Sanajoba Singh and Nimai Singh, with the help of Dorendro Singh and Raghumani Singh who had reached the hospital on learning about the incident from Sanajoba Singh while he was taking Ibohal Singh in the rickshaw. Dr. Ibema Devi (P. W. 10) attended on Ibohal Singh and called Dr. Lalmuhon Singh (P. W. 16), but Ibohal Singh succumbed to his injuries in about 10 or 15 minutes. Sanajoba Singh narrated the incident, as to how the appellant had inflicted the injuries on Ibohal Singh to Dorendro Singh, Raghumani Singh and others. Dorendro Singh went and informed Ibotan Singh (P. W. 1) (brother of Ibohal Singh's grand-father) about the incident, and Ibotan Singh went to the hospital along with Dorendro Singh. They met Ibohal Singh's father on way, but did not wait for him to accompany them as he was going on foot. On reaching the hospital Ibotan Singh found Ibohal Singh lying dead in the emergency room, and then he went and lodged report Ex. P-1 at the police station at 8.30 p.m. In the meantime, A.S.I. Bacha Singh (P. W. 9), Who was on "bazar duty", learnt about the incident and reached the hospital. A case was registered by the police, and the appellant surrendered on December 18, 1966. He was prosecuted for the offence of murder, but was acquitted by the Sessions Judge, as aforesaid. The Judicial Commissioner of Manipur has taken the view that the acquittal was based on flimsy and insignificant grounds as the case was not examined in its proper perspective, and he was convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid.

(3.) The name of the assailant was not stated in the first information report Ex. P1. On the other hand, it was stated there that Ibohal Singh had been stabbed by "some body" and the "culprits" may be arrested and dealt with. The Sessions Judge took this omission into consideration, and held that Sanajoba Singh (P. W. 2), who has been examined as the only eye-witness of the incident, was not a witness of the incident and that the name of the assailant was not known at all. An attempt was made to prove the dying declaration of the deceased, but reliance on it has not been placed on either side. The Sessions Judge also found that there was a discrepancy regarding the place of the incident, and he noticed the fact that no blood stains were found in or near the verandah of Bharat Shoe House, where the incident was said to have taken place. He noticed certain inherent improbabilities of the prosecution case. he disbelieved the version of the prosecution that Dorendro Singh and Raghumani Singh had not intervened to save their friend Sanajoba Singh in spite of the manhandling of Sanajoba Singh by the appellant and his associate, and the contention that they left him alone in spite of the furtherthreat by the appellant. The Sessions Judge also took notice of the fact that although, according to the prosecution, Sanajoba Singh received fist blows on the face at the hands of the appellant and his associate, no mark of injury was found at all. In addition to these factors, the Sessions Judge made a mention of the further fact that Sanajoba Singh did not, according to him, raise an alarm to have the appellant apprehended in the bazar even after he had dealt two knife blows on the person of Ibohal Singh. The other evidence on the record has also been criticised by the Sessions Judge as unsatisfactory, but we need not refer to it as it has not formed the basis of any argument before us. We shall therefore deal with those points which have been urged for our consideration by counsel on both sides.