MAHADEO ORAON Vs. STATE OF BIHAR (NOW JHARKHAND)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 27th March, 1996, passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Gumla, in Sessions Trial No. 160 of 1996, whereby, the sole appellant has been convicted under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.

(2.) The prosecution case, in short, as per the Fardbeyan (Ext. 3) of the informant Champa Oraon (P.W. 7), is that on 26th Aug., 1984 at about 5.00 p.m. when the informant came to his house, he saw his wife Pokri Oraon in the room in injured condition. There were injuries on the elbow of her right hand and abdomen. On query she told that earlier at about half an hour, when she was grinding Marua along with her little daughter aged 3 years on the varandah, the elder brother of the informant came there carrying a Tangi and gave a Tangi blow all on a sudden to her and again gave Tangi blow from the back portion of the Tangi on her face, elbow, abdomen and injured her and when she started crying, he dragged her into the room and threw her down and thereafter, fled away. Then the informant made Hulla on which Liti Oraon (P.W. 9), Mangri Orain (P.W. 8) and Mangra Oraon (P.W. 10) came there and in their presence also his wife told that Mahadeo Oraon had injured her by Tangi when she was grinding Marua and after that he dragged her in the room. Thereafter, the informant tried to find out the doctor in the village but after about one hour the wife of the informant died. It is further stated in the First information Report that the brother of the informant Mahdeo (appellant) was living separately from him and his wife had died about one month back but he was always keeping grudge for that with the informants family. Thereafter, the informant, it appears, came to the Police Station on the next day along with Liti Oraon (P.W. 9) and the Chowkidar Puran Baraik (P.W. 6). After the First Information Report was lodged, investigation was taken up and the inquest report (Ext. 4) was prepared in presence of Liti Oraon and Sukra Oraon (Ext. 4/a). Thereafter, the post mortem was conducted on the dead body of the deceased by Dr. C.M. Thakur (P.W. 5), who proved the post-mortem report (Ext. 5) and his signature thereon (Ext. 5/a). It also transpires that during the course of trial pages 1 to 35 and 36 to 46 of the case diary were exhibited as Exts. 6 and 6/1.

(3.) The appellant was charged under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.