DHENA TUDDU Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This jail appeal has been preferred by the accused appellant, who has been convicted under Section 304 Part I IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life in Sessions Case No. 509/90. The judgment of conviction and sentence was passed by then 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Dumka.

(2.) The accused-appellant was charged under Section 302, IPC for intentionally killing his father, Dadla Tuddu, in the after-noon hours at about 5 p.m. on 11-5-1990, at his house situated at village Jamkenali, P. S. Amarapara, within the then Sahebganj district. As per the prosecution case the deceased and the accused being the father and son used to live separately having a common court-yard and they had a long standing dispute regarding the landed prdperties and usufruct of the lands and the orchard. On previous occasions also both the son and the father indulged in quarrel for their legitimate shares in respect of the usufruct of the lands. It has been alleged that on the date of the occurrence in the evening house the accused had assaulted his father by means of a lathi made of Tar tree, as a result of which, he sustained injuries and he died out of those injuries. The dead body was kept covered by some cloth by the accused appellant. On the next day, in the morning hours, PW-5, Baha Tuddu, who used to fetch water from the well for the deceased found her master missing and on being asked the accused, who use to live in the neighbouring house of the same Angan, he confessed before her that on his assault by means of lathi of Tar in the last evening, his father had died and the dead body was also shown to her by the accused and then she called her husband and in presence of both of them the accused had confessed his guilt. She then rushed to the village Chowkidar, Singha Palladia, who came to the place of occurrence and saw the dead body and caught hold of the accused. He went to the Amrapara Police Station along with the accused and there the accused was made over to the Police and fardbeyan was made by PW-7, stating all the facts as to how he was reported by PW-5 and how the accused made his extra judicial confession before him and other villagers including PW-5, Baha Tuddu, PW-6, Thakur Murmu, and PW-2 Jissu Soren and others. It is alleged that before the Police also, the accused made confession. On arrest, the accused was forwarded to the Magistrate with a prayer for recording his confession under Section 164 Cr PC. Before the Magistrate, the accused stated that his father died due to accident and therefore, his statement was not recorded under Section 164 Cr PC. The police investigated the case and after holding inquest, the dead body was sent for autopsy and after closure of the investigation charge-sheet was submitted under Section 302, IPC. On being committed to the Session, charge was framed vide order dated 18-1-91, under Section 302, IPC and when the same was read over and explained to the accused, he pleaded not guilty.

(3.) The defence case as revealed from the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses and the statement made under Section 313 Cr PC of the accused is that the accused has been falsely implicated in the case as he was not present on the date of occurrence at his house and he took a plea of alibi in his statement made under, Section 313 Cr PC.