YADU HANSDA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NOBODY appears on behalf of the appellant. Mr. Ashish Verma, learned panel counsel is appointed as Amicus Curiae in this appeal to assist this court on behalf of the appellant.

(2.) THE prosecution examined 9 witnesses. PWs.1, 4, 5, 6,, 7 and 8 are either hearsay or tendered witnesses. PW9 is the Doctor, who conducted the postmortem. PW2 Churki Hansda is the only witness presented by the prosecution as an eyewitness. But on going through the deposition it is not possible to accept that she is an eyewitness. She inter alia stated that when there was marpit, she awoke. She also said that the deceased took liquor on the date of occurrence. She simply said that the appellant assaulted the deceased on her head by Axe due to which she died. She did not say anything about the other injuries found by the Doctor. She appears to be a chance witness.

(3.) IN the facts and circumstances of the case, it will not be safe to uphold the conviction of the appellant only on the basis of such evidence of PW2. In our opinion, the prosecution has not been able to prove its case against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubts. Accordingly, we are inclined to acquit him giving benefit of doubt. In the result, this appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court against the appellant is hereby set aside. The appellant, who is in jail custody, is directed to be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case.