KAPIL LAHERI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These criminal appeals have been directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17th March, 2008 and 18th March, 2008, respectively, passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Godda in connection with Sessions Trial No. 145 of 2003/11 of 2007, corresponding to G.R. No. 432 of 2003, arising out of Pathargama P.S. Case No. 59 of 2003, whereby the appellants have been held guilty for the offence punishable under Sec. 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.

(2.) The fact reveals from the Fardbeyan of Ful Kumari Devi, recorded on 26th April, 2003, at 20:00 hours, at the house of the informant, is that on 26th April, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. Banarsi Pandit (deceased) along with his daughter Rubi Kumari, aged two years, was taking rest on a cot in the courtyard of the house. The informant was engaged in domestic work, whereas mother of the deceased was sitting near her. In the meantime, all the appellants, who are named in the first information report, suddenly entered in the house and started causing assault to Banarsi Pandit (husband of the informant). When the informant tried to save her husband, she was pushed away. It is alleged that Kapil Laheri and Chhathu Laheri caught hold the hands and legs of Banarsi Pandit, whereas Manu Laheri took out a big knife and slit the neck of Banarsi. On Hullla, Ravindra Kumar and Jitendra Kumar, both sons of the deceased as well as the villagers reached to the place. On the basis of Fardbeyan of Ful Kumari Devi, Godda, Pathargama P.S. Case No. 59 of 2003 dated 26th April, 2003 under Sec. 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code against all the appellants was registered.

(3.) The investigation was carried out and charge sheet was submitted. Accordingly, cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and registered as Sessions Trial No. 145 of 2003. Charge under Sec. 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code was framed against the appellants to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in order to substantiate the charge examined altogether ten witnesses and proved Fardbeyan, formal first information report, inquest report, postmortem report etc. Learned Trial Judge, placing reliance on the documents and evidences available on record, held the appellants guilty for the offence alleged and inflicted sentence as indicated above.