SUKHU MAHTON Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment as both the appeals arise out of the same judgment and order. The appellants have impugned the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.7.1986 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nalanda, Biharshariff, in Session Trial No. 177/28 of 1985.

(2.) In Criminal Appeal No. 353 of 1986 there are two appellants, namely, Sukhu Mahton and Jageshwar Mahton, who are brothers. In Criminal Appeal No.361 of 1986, there are nine appellants, namely, Bakhori Mahto, Chamaru Mahto, Arvind Mahto, Bullu alias Brij Kishore, Nawal Mahto, Vijoy Mahto Shiban Mahto, Bina Mahto and Balgobind Mahto. All these appellants were proceeded on the charge for committing the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for committing the murder of one Shiban Mahton. They were further charged for the offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and accused Chamaru Mahton was further charged for the offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for having assaulted the Informant Manju Kumari by means of a Kakut (chopper).

(3.) Badri Narain Prasad (P.W. 1) lodged an information before the police on 27.5.1994 at 7 hours stating therein that on the proceeding night at about 8 p.m. a person of village Makdumpur informed him that his cousin brother (Phuphera brother) was murdered by somebody at 5.30 on the previous evening in south PAIN (canal) of the village and the deceased's head was traceless. Mother of Shiban took the dead body and kept in her house. While has was coming to the police station for informing about the same, he met with the Chaukidar, to whom he narrated the facts. He also informed the police that about the occurrence mother and sister of Shiban Mahton would give details. On the basis of this first information report, investigation was started and after completion of the same, charge-sheet was submitted and subsequently the appellants were put on trial.