KALU MURMU Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. This appeal has been directed by the sole appellant named above against the judgment dated 21.8.1997 passed by Shri Ram Paksh Sinha, Sessions Judge, Santhal Paragana, Dumka in Sessions Case No. 237 of 1984 whereby and whereunder the said appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. 2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the fardbeyan (Ext. 2) of P.W.9 Karan Murmu recorded by S.I., M.P.Yadav, O.C. Masalia PS., District Dumka recorded on 19.9.1982 at 16.00 hours in village Sitlo, P.S. Masalia regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place on 18.9.1982 between 9.00 PM. and 10.00 PM. on the village road in front of the house of the appellant. Ext. 3 is the formal F.I.R. drawn on the basis of the fardbeyan (Ext. 2) which has been received in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate on 20.9.1982. 3. According to the prosecution case the appellant Kalu Murmu is the elder brother of PW.9, Karan Murmu, the informant, and Gongur Murmu, the deceased of this case is the younger brother of the said informant. It is alleged that at the time of the occurrence the appellant as well as the deceased were under intoxication and there had been an altercation between them and Gongur Murmu had asked the appellant as to why he has constructed the wall on his land. It is also alleged that the appellant and the deceased were on litigating terms from before in respect of the land on which the wall has been raised and the said case is still subjudice. It is also alleged that the appellant is the member of the party of new Pradhan, Som Marandi and he used to pressurize the informant and others to join the party of the new Pradhan. It is also alleged that this altercation was taking place north of the house of the appellant and of the deceased in the lane of the village and in course of altercation the appellant went inside his house and, thereafter, came out of his house with bow and arrow and discharged two shots from his bow and one of the shots caused an injury on the right arm of the deceased and the other arrow shot by him penetrated in the chest of the deceased. Thereafter, Gongur Murmu raised alarms that the appellant has assaulted him by arrows and on his alarms the informant came there and he found P.W.a Topne Murmu and P.W.4, Jiyamuni Hembram, the sister and wife, respectively of the deceased at the place of occurrence. It is alleged that Gongur Murmu fell on the ground and he was writhing in pains and, thereafter, the appellant hurriedly went inside his house and soon, thereafter, Gongur Murmu died there. It is also alleged that both the arrows shot by the appellant were found embedded on the right arm and the chest of the deceased. Lastly it has been alleged that genesis of the occurrence is the land dispute between the appellant and the deceased and due to that the appellant has committed the murder of the deceased. 4. The appellant has pleaded not guilty to the charge levelled against him and claims himself to be innocent and to have committed no offence and that he has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity. It has also been contended that the dead body of the deceased Gongur Murmu was recovered in the night by the informant and, thereafter, the informant in collusion with other villagers have implicated this appellant in this got up case. 5. The prosecution has examined in all ten witnesses to substantiate this case. P.W.9, Karan Murmu is the informant of this case and Ext. 3 is his fardbeyan regarding the occurrence. p.w.a, Topne Murmu is the sister of the informant as well as of the appellant and the deceased and P.W.4, Jiyamuni Hembram is the widow of the deceased of this case. P.Ws.9, a and 4 are the alleged ocular witnesses of the occurrence in question. P.W.2, Mahabir Singh, P.W.3, Kaleshwar Tudu and P.W.?, Lobin Tudu are the hearsay witnesses of the occurrence in question and claim to have learnt about the occurrence from the informant as well as P.W.a and P.W.4 and they claim to have seen the deceased having arrows embedded on his chest. P.W.1, Patu Ram, the village chowkidar, P.W.5, Devi Marandi and P.W.6, Baris Marandi have been tendered by the prosecution in this case. P.W.11, Dr. Bimal Kumar has conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of the deceased Gongur Murmu and the postmortem report per his pen in respect thereof is Ext. 5. P.W.10, Maheshwar Prasad Yadav is the I.O. of this case and he has proved the fardbeyan (Ext. 2) the formal F.I.R. (Ext. 3) and the Inquest Report (Ext. 4) of the deceased. No oral and documentary evidence has been adduced on behalf of the defence in support of his defence version. 6. In view of the oral and documentary evidence on the record the learned court below has found the appellant guilty for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has convicted and sentenced him as stated above.