DEONANDAN SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16 th February,2006 and 17th February, 2006 respectively, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C., Latehar in connection with Sessions Case no. 0011 of 2004 corresponding to G.R. Case no. 126 of 2003, arising out of Manika P.S. Case no. 10 of 2003, whereby the appellant has been held guilty for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 20,000/ - and in default of making payment of fine further simple imprisonment for one year.

(2.) The fact emerges from the fard -beyan of Nirmala Kumari, recorded on 10.4.2003 at 14:00 hrs. is that on 9.4.2003 when the informant returned home from market she found her uncle Deonandan Singh (appellant) present in the house. It is disclosed that appellant Deonandan Singh was working as Assistant Engineer in Telecommunication Department, Ranchi. All the family members including the informant slept in the house after having their meal. At about 3 a.m. in the morning the informant woke up after hearing some knocking and groaning sound of her mother. When she turned towards bed of her mother, she found that her uncle Deonandan Singh (appellant) has been inflicting blows upon her mother by means of tangi causing injuries to her. The informant intervened and snatched away the axe from the hands of Deognandan Singh (appellant) and raised alarm but, till then the appellant fled away from the place of occurrence. The informant followed the appellant to some distance but, could not succeed to apprehend him. On the basis of fard -beyan of informant Nirmala Kumari PW -6 Manika P.S. Case no. 10 of 2003 U/s 302 I.P.C. was registered against the appellant Deonandan Singh. The Police after due investigation submitted charge sheet and accordingly cognizance of the offence was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and registered as Sessions Case no. 0011 of 2004.

(3.) The appellant stood charged for the offence punishable under section 302 Indian Penal Code to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. To substantiate the charge the prosecution has examined altogether eight witnesses and proved documents like fard -beyan, inquest report, post -mortem report, seizure list etc. The learned Additional Sessions Judge placing reliance on the evidence and documents available, held the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under section 302 IPC and sentenced him as indicated above.