USHA RAM MAHATO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence date 7th August, 2003 and 8th August, 2003 respectively, passed by the 1st Additional Judicial Commissioner, Khunti in Sessions Trial No. 520 of 1990, arising out of Bundu P.S. Case No. 9 of 1990, whereby the present appellant -accused had been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 30 34 I.P.C. and has been awarded a fine Rs.10,000/ - and in default of payment fine further he has to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on 19th March, 1990 at about 10p.m., father of the informant, namely Shanti Devi (P.W. 6) had come to the house of the informant for purchase of oxen. Shanti Devi (P.W. 6) is the widow of the deceased. At night, when father of the informant and the husband of the informant were counting money, accused persons, namely Usha Ram Mahato, Maheshwar Mahato and Gopal Mahato came to the house of the informant. Gopal Mahato is the father -in -law of the informant while Usha Ram Mahato and Maheshwar Mahato are the sons of Gopal Mahato, i.e. they are brother -in -laws of the informant. Accused persons started quarreling with the husband of the informant and demanded the entire money from the husband of the informant. On objection by the husband of the informant, accused persons, who were armed with weapons, such as 'Sabar, 'Tabla' and 'Lathi' entered into the house of the informant. It was alleged by the accused persons that husband of the informant was committing theft and passing the money to his father -in -law, i.e. father of the informant. One of the accused persons gave blow on the forehead of the husband of the informant and accused Gopal Mahato, having snatched the money, chased the husband of the informant. Husband of the informant was intercepted on the road and thereafter, he was assaulted by all the accused persons, Sons of the informant, i.e. P.W. 3 and P.W. 4 informed the informant (P.W. 6) that the accused persons assaulted the deceased and they have killed him. On being informed, informant with her sons and father ran away and shut themselves in a room of her house and thereafter when village Mukhiya, namely Ichha Mahato, who is P.W. 8, came to the house of the informant, whole incident was narrated to him and they stayed at the house of the Mukhiya for the whole night and went to Bundu Police Station next morning where F.I.R. was lodged on 20th March, 1990.

(3.) COUNSEL appearing for the State, A.P.P., vehemently submitted that the whole incident has taken place on 19th March, 1990 at Village -Damari, District -Khunti, at about 10 p.m. There are four eye witnesses, who are P.Ws. 3, 4, 6 and 7. While P.Ws. 3 and 4 are the sons of the deceased Khudi Ram Mahto, P.W. 6 is his wife. The A.P.P. further submitted that looking to the deposition of these eye witnesses, they have narrated the incident in detail and initially there were three accused persons. As two of them have expired during the course of the trial, therefore, present accused appellant was the only accused, who had been awarded life imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and for a fine of Rs.10,000/ -. There is no major omission or contradiction in their evidence. This aspect of the matter was properly appreciated by the trial court and no error has been committed by the trial court in convicting the accused for the murder of Khudi Ram Mahato and therefore, this appeal deserves to be dismissed.