LAWS(JHAR)-2024-12-24

KAIL BHUIYAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

Decided On December 09, 2024
Kail Bhuiyan Appellant
V/S
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence both dtd. 23/7/2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Palamau in Sessions Trial No. 626 of 1998, whereby the appellant has been held guilty and convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 302/34 of Indian Penal Code and he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.

(2.) Mr. A.K. Kashyap, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant, submits that considering the evidence of P.Ws. 3, 4 and 7, who are the eye witnesses, and read with the evidence of the doctor, ingredients for the offence under Sec. 302 of IPC is not made out as it was a case of single blow given in the spur of moment. It is further submitted that though there is allegation that indiscriminate assault was made with the stick, but there is evidence of only one injury on the head of the deceased and the other injuries are superficial causing haematoma. There was land dispute between the parties and admittedly, no sharp cutting weapon or deadly weapon was used in the assault. There was no intention on the part of the appellant to commit murder of the deceased. On this ground, he prays that the conviction under Sec. 302 of IPC be set aside.

(3.) Ms. Nehala Sharmin, learned counsel for the State, has defended the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. She submits that P.Ws. 3, 4 and 7 are the eye witnesses to the said occurrence. They had seen the appellant along with one Bhuneshwar Bhuiyan coming with sticks and assaulting the deceased indiscriminately. There is no material to disbelieve these eye witnesses. The doctor also opined that there was head injury which resulted in death. Thus, the appellant's conviction under Sec. 302 of IPC was justified.