BAL KISHUN MAHTO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal is directed against the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.7.2007 and 17.7.2007 respectively passed by Sri Ramendra Nath Rai, the learned Additional Session Judge, FTC-V, Hazaribagh in Session Trial No. 137 of 2005, arising out of Patratu P.S. Case No. 191/2004, corresponding to G.R. No. 2478 of 2004, whereby and whereunder, the learned trial court having found the sole appellant guilty for committing murder of his wife, convicted him for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- under Section 302 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he was further directed to undergo three months simple imprisonment. The sole appellant was further sentenced 5 years' rigorous imprisonment and Rs.3,000/- fine for the offence under Section 201 IPC and in default of payment of fine, he was further directed to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case is based upon the Fardbeyan of one Rameshwar Mahto wherein, he stated that on 10.10.2004 at about 6:00 a.m. the brother of his son-in-law came in motorcycle and informed that the thieves have entered into their house and assaulted his son-in-law and have murdered his daughter. On receipt of said information, the informant along with his brother Bhuneshwar Mahato and son Chhotelal Mahato rushed to the house of his son-in-law. When he reached the place of occurrence and entered in the room, he found on the floor his daughter, lying dead and she was murdered by cutting her throat. There was blood on the floor. When the informant asked his son-in-law as to how there was blood stains in his apparels, then his son-in-law started weeping and confessed before him that he has committed the crime in rage. He stated that at night, there was quarrel between him and his wife and in rage, by Farsa, he cut the throat of his wife. The informant further stated that his grand-daughter Sugwa also informed him that at night, a quarrel was going on between her father and her mother. He stated that in the year 1994, his daughter was married with the appellant. In 1998 for committing dacoity in train, the appellant was taken in custody and remained in jail for 5-6 years and in the meantime, his daughter developed illicit relationship with Dhaneshwar, the younger brother of his son- in-law and she became pregnant. After terminating the pregnancy, his daughter was sent to her paternal home but again she was sent back to her matrimonial home. He stated that the appellant was not keeping good terms with the deceased and the appellant has committed the murder.

(3.) After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted chargesheet against the appellant under Sections 302 and 201 IPC. The case was committed to the Court of Session. Charges were framed under Sections 302 and 201 IPC against the sole accused, which was read over and explained to him, but the accused pleaded innocence and claimed to be tried.