PARNA ORAON Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants, Parna Lohar and Ganesh Lohar, were arrayed as A2 and Al before the Trial Judge, along with two others, Jingu Oraon and Afe Kujur, who were arrayed as A3 and A4 and who were acquitted by the Trial Judge. The Trial Judge, while acquitting Ganesh Lohar (Al) of the charge under Section 3021.P.C., found the first appellant, Parna Lohar (A2), guilty under Section 302 I.P.C., for which he was sentenced to imprisonment for life. Ganesh Lohar, who was arrayed as Al, was found guilty only under Section 2011.P.C. The first appellant (A2) was also found guilty under that section. Both of them, for the said offence, were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years.

(2.) P.W. 1 Abdul Sattar is the father of the deceased Jainul. It is the case of the prosecution that at the time of Murma Mela, the first appellant Parna Lohar took loan of Rs. 200/- from the deceased but did not repay the amount.

(3.) At about 6.30 p.m. on 31-12-1986, while P.W. 1 Abdul Sattar was in his house along with his son, Jainul, one Ram Dayal Mahto went to the house of P.W. 1 and told Jainul that he is wanted by the first appellant. The deceased left the house with Ram Dayal Mahto. At that time, P.W.9 Shakhawat and P.W.4 Abdul Gaffar were in the house of P.W. 1. The deceased who went with Ram Dayal Mahto did not return home that night. P.W. 1, therefore, searched for his son, but could not find him. On the next day, while he was searching, he met P.W.3 Kabil Mian who told that the deceased was seen in the company of the accused Parna Lohar and Ganesh Lohar at Khalihan. P.W.1 went to the Khalihan of the first appellant but could not find his son. He found first and second appellants, sitting in front of fire, enjoying themselves. P.W.1 came to the conclusion that his son, Jainul, must have been murdered and his body would have been concealed by the appellants and others who (A3 & A4) are their friends. The body was ultimately traced on the basis of the information furnished by the Choukidar, who was examined as P.W.6. Thereafter fardbeyan was given by P.W. 1 at the police station. The said fardbeyan is Ext.6. Investigation in the crime was taken by the Investigating Officer, who conducted inquest and prepared inquest report Ext. 7.