NANHO LOHAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present Cr. Appeal is directed against the judgment and order of sentence passed by the VIth Addl. Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in S.T. No. 633 of 1994 on 19.7.2000 whereby and whereunder the appellant Nanho Lohar was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.

(2.) THE prosecution story, as it stands narrated in the fardbeyan of the informant, Basanti Devi on 13.11.1993, was that her son Pramod Lohar (since deceased) aged about 17/18 years was a dumper driver in A.C.A. Company. It was alleged that on 12.11.1993 at about 12 O'Clock in the night while he was returning from his duty and was passing through the village lane, opposite the house of Nanho Lohar (appellant) he was held by him on account of old enmity and was dragged inside his house. It was further alleged that the appellant inflicted several blows with the dagger and the grinding stone on the head and other parts of his body. On alarm, several villagers long with the informant assembled there where she witnessed screaming of her son Pramod Lohar who was being dragged by the appellant towards railway line and at the sight of the witnesses he escaped leaving Pramod Lohar there. Pramod Lohar narrated when called upon as to the cause of the injuries sustained that he was forcibly dragged inside the house of the appellant Nanho Lohar who assaulted him with the dagger and grinding stone. The informant found pool of blood in the house of the appellant and grinding stone, smeared with blood used in such assault. In the night itself the injuries of Pramod Lohar were bandaged by the local doctor who referred the injured to other place for better management but in the early morning the victim succumbed his injuries. The police registered Khelari P.S. Case No. 70 of 1993 on 13.11.1999 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and after investigation the police submitted charge sheet against the appellant for the same offence. The appellant was put on trial after framing of charge when pleaded not guilt and claimed to be tried.

(3.) THE appellant Nanho Lohar in his statement recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. declined his guilt with the specific defence that on the alleged date and time of the occurrence he was not in his house and taking such advantage Pramod Lohar (since deceased) entered into his house with evil design and attempted to tease his wife but on account of alarm raised the villagers assembled there and assaulted him (Pramod Lohar). He further explained that at the relevant time he was playing gambling in the Janki Temple and the occurrence was communicated to him subsequent day. Yet we do not find any evidence adduced on the point of alibi of the appellant.