GALIA PANDIT Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY Court: By the impugned judgment, the trial court while acquitting 15 accused persons found this Appellant guilty for committing murder of one Dhaneshwar Pandit. Accordingly, he was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ - with default clause.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on 19.3.2000 while the informant Khageshwar Pandit (P.W. 1) and others were sitting in front of the house of Bharat Pandit, Jodho Pandit and Bhekhlal Pandit came over there and asked for tobacco for them. That led to a verbal altercation. However, due to intervention of others, the matter could be pacified. After ten minutes, those 2 persons and 14 others including the Appellant came variously armed in front of the house of Bharat Pandit and started pelting stones, as a result of which, some one got hurt. When alarm was raised, villagers gathered over there and they got the matter again pacified. When they went away, Khageshwar Pandit (P.W.1) left home along with Dhaneshwar Pandit (the deceased)to come to the police station on a Motor Cycle to inform about the occurrence. When they reached near a school, number of accused persons including the Appellant intercepted them. One of the accused forcibly brought down the deceased from the Motor Cycle. Thereupon the Appellant inflicted injuries upon him through sword. When informant tried to save the life of Dhaneshwar Pandit, the Appellant inflicted injuries through sword on his head. When other persons from the side of the informant reached over there, the accused persons went away.

(3.) ON submission of the charge sheet, 16 accused persons were put on trial. During trial, the informant was examined as P.W.1. P.W.2, Token Prajapati, P.W.3, Chhoti Pandit and P.W.7, Bharat Pandit are witnesses to the first occurrence. However, they also deposed that when they reached near the school, they found dead body of the deceased where they were told by the informant that the deceased has been done to death by the Appellant. P.W.6 is another doctor, who upon examining the informant found two lacerated injuries as well as two injuries in the nature of scratches caused by hard and blunt substance. The said doctor had also examined one Nilkanth Pandit (P.W.10). The Investigating Officer was examined as P.W.11.