ANIK MANDAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the sole appellant Anik Mandal is directed against the judgment and order dated 28th August, 1986 passed by 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Munger, in Sessions Trial No. 400 of 1984 convicting and sentencing the appellant to undergo life imprisonment under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC).

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 8 -4 -1984 at about 10 a.m. Informant Ram Kishun Mandal (P W. 5), the own brother of appellant, was sitting with Tetar Tanti (not examined) at the bungalow (sitting room) or Tetar Tanti when his daughter Maya Devi (not examined) came there and informed him that the appellant was beating his wife Manorma Devi (deceased) after confining her in a room. The informant asked Maya Devi to go back and he also followed her. In the way, he found his wife Radha Devi (P.W. 3), his another daughters Baby Kumari (P.W. 2) and Milo Devi (not examined) and his son Pramod Kumar (P.W. 4) standing near a well situate towards south east of his house waiting for him. His daughter Maya Devi was also standing there. The informant stopped there but because of quarrelsome nature of appellant, he could not dare for going to his house in the portion of which appellant was residing and he sent his son Pramod Mandal for calling one Shibu Paswan (P.W. 1). who happens to be the friend of appellant. On arrival of Shibu Paswan, the informant and his family members along with Shibu Paswan came to the house and from the lane and asked the appellant to open the door because the door of the house was closed from inside. The appellant did not open the door and replied that he will not open it. The informant called the deceased, wife of appellant, who also asked for help. Wife of informant and his other family members through another door of the house entered the Angan of house and asked the deceased, wife of appellant, to open the door upon which the appellant abused them and gave threatening that he would kill them also. The informant and Shibu Paswan then went to call other villagers and his other family members remained in the lane. After some time villagers, namely, Bimlanand Singh (P.W. 10), Bijay Shankar Singh, (P.W. 9), Sitaram Das (P.W. 7) and Harkhu Paswan (not examined) came there. By that time the appellant had gone on the roof of his house in order to escape. Villagers compelled him to come down and caught hold of him. The appellant, had already locked the room of his house. The keys of lock were taken from him and the door of the room was opened and the informant found that wife of appellant was lying in the room in naked condition with injuries on her person, The wife of informant with the help of other women of village brought out the wife of appellant from the room for taking her to hospital but she succumbed to injuries in the osara itself. A cake of lifebuoy soap was found kept tied with the waist of appellant with which he had washed away his hands and feet and there were blood stains on his dhoti which he was wearing at that time. The informant with the help of villagers and Chaukidar Baijnath Paswan took the appellant to police station on the same day at about 13.00 hours got the FIR (Ext. 4) recorded. About the motive of the occurrence the informant in the FIR simply stated that the appellant is a man of hot temper and used to quarrel and become ready to assault on petty matters and everyone was scared of his such behaviour. During the course of investigation, the police seized blood -stained chhura, bloodstained stick, pieces of broken glass bottle, blood -stained clothes, bloodstained soil, a used lifebuoy soap and old lock & key and prepared seizure - list (Ext. 2). The blood -stained dhoti which the appellant was wearing at that time was also seized and a separate seizure list (Ext. 2/1) was prepared. Inquest report (Ext. 1) of the dead body of Manorma Devi, wife of appellant was prepared and the dead body was sent for post -mortem examination and thereafter post -mortem examination report (Ext. 3) was collected. After investigation the police submitted charge -sheet against the appellant, under Sec. 302, I.P.C.

(3.) AFTER cognizance the case was committed to the Court of Session where charge under Sec. 302, I.P.C. against the appellant was framed who denied the charge and pleaded not guilty.