MANJHI TUDU Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal has been directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 29th July,2006 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge -I, Rajmahal in connection with Sessions case no.132 of 2004, whereby the appellant has been held guilty for the offence punishable under section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay fine of Rs.5000/ - and in default of making payment of fine, he shall suffer further rigorous imprisonment for six months.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, as it appears from the fardbeyan of Hopa Tuddu recorded on 11.11.2003 at 10.15 hours in the Government Hospital, in brief, is that on 10.11.2003 in the evening, the appellant went to the house of Hopa Tuddu(deceased) and requested him to accompany for some work. Conceding the request, Hopa Tuddu left home with appellant. It is alleged that after reaching near a pond, the appellant inflicted knife blow on the stomach of Hopa Tuddu and fled away. Presence of injured Hopa Tuddu was noticed by a passers -by, who ran to the village and raised hulla whereafter Kuanwar Tuddu and Nandu Tuddu reached to the place to whom injured Hopa Tuddu disclosed about the assault caused to him by the appellant. Thereafter, Hopa Tuddu was brought home, but could not be removed to hospital for treatment due to night. On the following morning, he was taken to Barharwa Hospital where some treatment was provided. In the Hospital, fardbeyan of Hopa Tuddu was recorded, on the basis of which, Rajmahal -Barharwa P.S. Case no. 77 of 2003 dated 11.11.2003 under sections 324 and 307 I.P.C. was registered. Since the injury caused to Hopa Tuddu was grievous, he was removed to Pakur Hospital where he died on 14.11.2003 and thereafter section 302 I.P.C. vide order dated 19.11.2003 was added. The police, after completion of investigation, submitted charge sheet and accordingly cognizance under section 302 I.P.C. was taken and the case was committed to the court of session and registered as Sessions Case no. 132 of 2004.

(3.) Charge under section 302 I.P.C. against sole appellant -Manjhi Tuddu was framed to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in order to substantiate charge has examined altogether nine witnesses and proved documents like inquest report, post mortem report, fardbeyan, injury report etc. Learned Additional Sessions Judge placing reliance on the evidence and documents, held the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him as indicated above.