MARTAM SINKU Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16-9-1989 in S.T. No. 44/98 passed by Smt. Shakuntala Sinha, the then 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Chaibasa whereby and whereunder the appellants have been convicted under Section 302 of the I.P.C., on the charge of committing the murder of Rajendra Sinku and they have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each. Further, appellants, Mana Sinku and Jai Ram Sinku have been convicted under Section 323 of the I.P.C. for voluntarily causing hurt to Roya Ram Sinku, the informant, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month thereunder. Both the sentences passed on appellants Jai Ram Sinku and Mana Sinku have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) Briefly put, the prosecution case is as under :-On 2-9-1987, on the occasion of Jomnama parv two friendly football matches were played in between the boys of villages Jamdih and Basasai from 9 a.m. to 9.30 a.m. and thereafter between the teams of Jamdih and Matkampi from 10 a.m. to 10.30 a.m. After the game was over the players and spectators dispersed. Thereafter during the day time there was an altercation between Rajendra Sinku (since deceased) on the one hand, and accused Doge Sinku, Guru Sinku and Maran Singh Laguri on the other and they had given fist blows to him. On the same day in the evening Rajendra Sinku, the deceased narrated the incident to informant, Roya Ram Sinku (P.W.3).On 2-9-1987, around 7 p.m., the informant along with the deceased, Rajendra Sinku, Roya Sinku, son of Kedia Sinku (P.W.1) Renso Sinku (P.W.2) and Turi Sinku (P.W.6) was going to village Matkampi to take part in the dance on the occasion of Sirka festival. When they reached in between the house of Ladura Sinku and Joto Sinku, sixteen accused persons, named in theF.I.R., including the appellants, armed with lathi-dandas, surrounded them and uttered that deceased Rajendra Sinku is not to be spared and is to be killed. Thereafter appellants, Guru Sinku, Jai Ram Sinku, Mana Sinku, Martam Sinku and co-accused Dadu Laguri and Moran Sinku (absconder) started giving lathi and danda blows as a result of which Rajendra Sinku sustained wounds and fell down on the ground. The informant rushed to save him whereupon appellants, Mana Sinku and Jai Ram Sinku and co-accused, Satish Sinku (whose trial was separated as he was a juvenile) assaulted and wounded him with lathi whereafter he fled to save himself. The other companions of the informant escaped to save themselves. Later on the informant learnt that the deceased had died on the spot. The dead body of Rajendra Sinku was lifted by Roya Sinku (P.W.1), and kept near the house of Gura Kuntia (P.W.5). The informant was taken to his home by Sona Ram Kuntia (P.W.7) and Sidiu Kuntia (P.W.4). The informant was carried to the State Dispensary at Hat Gamaharia by his villagers on the next day (3-9-1987) where he was treated for the wounds.On the basis of an out door slip regarding wounds sustained by the informant, received from doctor (P.W.13) of State Dispensary at Hat Gamaharia, through Jamadar Sinku, Mukhiya (P.W.9), Officer-in-charge, Tonto P. S. (P.W.15) visited Hat Gamaharia State Dispensary and recorded the fardbeyan (Ext. 4) of the informant. On its basis, the present case was instituted, the formal F.I.R. (Ext. 5) was drawn up. He proceeded to village Jamdih, held inquest over the dead body of Rajendra Sinku which was lying in the compound of Gura Singh Kuntia (P.W.5) (Ext. 6 is the inquest report), he took charge of blood stained earth therefrom under seizure list (Ext. 7) and inspected the place of occurrence which is village Kachhawa in front of the house of Joto Ladura Sinku at village Jamdih. There is a tamarind tree on the East and other on the West of the village road and the place of occurrence is the village road between the two tamarind trees. The village road runs North to South and it is to the West of the house of Joto Ladura Sinku. At the time of the inspection it was drizzling and water had collected on the village road and no blood mark was found on the spot. After completion of investigation charge-sheet was laid in Court against the accused persons.

(3.) The main defence is of innocence and false implication.