MAHESH MAHTO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal by Special Leave is filed by Mahesh Mahto (A-2) challenging the conviction and sentence passed under Sections 302, 201/34, I.P.C. Originally Umesh Mahto (A-1), Mahesh Mahto (A-2) and Ramdulari Devi (A-3) were tried for an offence punishable under Sections 302, 201/34, I.P.C. for committing the murder of Meera Devi, the wife of Umesh Mahto (A-1). Meera Devi was married to A-1 in the year 1982 and Duragman (second marriage) took place in the month of Baishakh, 1983. It is alleged by the prosecution that at the time of Duragman A-1 demanded a scooter but the said demand could not be fulfilled because of financial difficulties of the brother of Meera Devi who however,, assured that he will give a bicycle. Accordingly a bicycle was given to A-1. Despite this A-1 and other accused were not satisfied and they made a further demand of some furniture articles. The brother of Meera Devi was unable to meet these demands at that time but, however these furniture items were supplied to them at a later stage. It is alleged by the prosecution that A-1, A-2 and A-3 were not fully satisfied and were causing harassment to Meera Devi. The brother of Meera Devi sought to patch up the differences through a mediator even then things could not be sorted out and harassment continued. It is further alleged by the prosecution that on 12-9-1984 Ram Vinod Prasad went to Ramdeo Mahto (Mama) to pay him the cost of furniture items and thereafter both of them went to the house of A-1 to request him and his family members not to harass and assault Meera Devi. When they enquired about Meera Devi, Biseshar Mahto told him that she is not in the house since last three days. When this information was given to Ramdeo Mahto he came to the village of Umesh Mahto (A-1) and made enquiries about Meera Devi. None of the inmates was able to give any information about her. When enquiries were made in the village, an old lady who was picking up cow dung told him that on Sunday last all the three accused persons committed murder of Meera Devi and threw her dead body in the river Gandak. Ram Vinod Prasad thereafter went to Khanpur Police Station and lodged the report (Ext.2). The FIR (Ext.5) was drawn up and investigation commenced. The investigating agency could not trace the dead body of Meera Devi despite its search, however, Ram Vinod Prasad and his brother continued the search and ultimately the dead body of Meera Devi was found at the bank of river Gandak on 15-9-1984. The information in that behalf was sent to the police who arrived there and prepared the inquest report. The dead body was sent to Sadar Hospital, Samastipur for post-mortem examination. After completing the investigation the three accuse persons were put up for trial for an offence punishable under Sections 302, 201/34, I.P.C.

(2.) The prosecution case entirely rests on circumstantial evidence and to prove the same it examined various witnesses and also placed on record the documentary evidence. Dr. Jamaluddin (P.W.9), Dr. B. N. Prasad (P.W.10) and Dr. K. C. Sinha (P.W.11) who jointly held the post-mortem examination were examined at the trial.

(3.) At the outset it may be stated that there is no challenge to the fact that Meera Devi died homicidal death. It is, therefore, not necessary to refer to the evidence of these three doctors in details. Suffice it to say that the team of doctors noticed fracture of 3rd, 4th and 5th thoracic ribs on front of the left side of the chest and found blood clots on the corresponding inner surface of the chest wall. Phoracic (Thoracic) cavity was full of blood clots. On further dissection middle portion of the left lung was found ruptured. Stomach was not containing water. There was no foreign body in trachea. Lungs alveoli was not distended in water. Two nails of six 1" x 21/2" respectively were found pierced through and through on Rt. dorsum of foot and Rt. hand respectively. Injuries caused by nails were post-mortem in nature. Nails had been preserved and sealed and were handed over to constables. The antemortem injuries in the chest were caused by hard and blunt substance which were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. We,, therefore, see no hesitation in holding that Meera Bai met with a homicidal death.