SETH MURMU Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SETH Murmu, arrayed as A -l, was found guilty for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code by the trial Judge. Maina Tudu, who was arrayed as A -2 and who is the mother -in -law of the appellant, Seth Murmu, was acquitted. The present appeal is by Seth Murmu against the conviction and sentence.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is as follows : Jetha Soren, the deceased in this case, is the father of PW 1, Maina Soren. The deceased Jetha Soren was disputing the fidelity of his wife, Maina Tudu, and there were some ill feelings between him and his wife, Maina Tudu. Therefore, Maina Tudu left the house of her husband and was living with her sister in a nearby village. On the date of incident i.e. on 1.4.1985, the appellant was informed by Maina Tudu that her husband is suspecting her fidelity. On getting the said information, the appellant rushed towards the father -in - law 'shouse. On seeing the deceased, the appellant assaulted him. The deceased ran away from the place and entered the house of one Somai Murmu. The appellant followed him and beat him. The deceased went to the house of PW 1, which was nearby and the appellant, who followed him, caught hold of his neck and thereafter fisted and beaten him with his lathi, which he had on his hand. PW 1. who was in the house, saw the occurrence. On hearing the alarm, PWs 2 and 3 also came to the place. They saw the appellant going away from the place. Information was given to Village Pradhan, PW 8, Ranjan Soren, and Mukhiya, PW 7, Bharat Mahto. They called the appellant and questioned him. He told him that he had beaten his father -in -law. Thereafter, fardbeyan, Ext. 2, was given by PW 1 at the police station on 2.4.1985 at noon, on the basis of which formal FIR, Ext. 2/1, was registered. After the registration of crime, investigation was taken up by police officer, who, after conducting inquest, sent the body for postmortem.

(3.) AFTER the completion of investigation, final report was filed and the appellant denied the incriminating circumstances, put against him under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.