SHANICHARIYA DEVI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NO body appears for the appellants.

(2.) MR. Rajiva Sharma, learned senior counsel submitted that the appellants have taken away the file from him.

(3.) THE prosecution examined 9 witnesses. P.W. 9 is the investigating officer and P.W. 8 is the doctor who conducted post- mortem on the deceased and found one lacerated wound on his head caused by hard blunt substance to be the cause of death. None of P.W. 1 to 7 are the eye-witnesses to the actual occurrence. The conviction is based on the confession said to have been made by the appellant Sanichar Rai before the witnesses that he killed the father of the informant. But, from the evidence of the investigating officer, it appears that none of the witnesses disclosed before him about such confession. Against Shanichariya Devi the case is that she called the deceased, but it is also stated in F.I.R. that on her alarm, the informant went to her house, the place of occurrence. Nothing specific has come against the appellants Ganesh Rai and Sahdeo Rai. Therefore, the prosecution has not been able to prove the manner of actual occurrence beyond all reasonable doubts.