MOYKA PURTY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsels for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) Appellant is aggrieved by the Judgment of conviction dated 21.08.2008 and Order of sentence dated 208.2008, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Chaibasa, in S.T. No.53 of 2006, whereby, the accused Moyka Purty, who was facing the trial along with his wife Pangila Kui for the offence under Sections 302 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code, has been found guilty and convicted for the same. The co-accused, wife of the appellant, has been given the benefit of doubt and she has been acquitted of the charge. Upon hearing on the point of sentence, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the said offence.

(3.) The prosecution case was instituted on the basis of the fardbeyan of Menjo Purty, daughter of the deceased Man Singh Purty, recorded on 26.08.2005 at Bazartand, Goilkera, at about 7 to 7:30 PM. In the fardbeyan, the informant has stated that on the previous day, at about 8 PM in the night, her child became seriously ill, whereupon, she along with her father Man Singh Purty was taking her child to a doctor for treatment. At about 9 to 10 PM, when they reached near the house of the Moyka Purty, Moyka Purty armed with bow and arrow and his son Mohan Purty armed with tono (a sharp cutting weapon) came there and Moyka Purty Shot arrow on her father. The first arrow did not hit her father; second and third arrows were pierced in the stomach and chest of the father of the informant. Mohan Purty, the son of Moyka Purty, slit the neck of her father by tono. When she raised alarm, both the accused fled away. Thereafter, with the help of the villagers, she brought her injured father to her house and thereafter he was being taken to Goilkera hospital, but he died in the way. Thereafter, in the morning, she was bringing the dead body of her father to the Police Station, but she met the police at Bazartand, where she gave her fardbeyan. In the fardbeyan, she has stated that there was previous enmity between her father and Moyka Purty as her father had assaulted the wife of the Moyka Purty alleging that she was practicing witchcraft. On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant, Goilkera P.S. Case No.26 of 2005, corresponding to G.R. No.240 of 2005, was instituted for the offence under Sections 302 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code, against the accused Moyka Purty and his son Mohan Purty, and investigation was taken up. After investigation, it appears that the charge-sheet was also submitted against Pangila Kui, the wife of the accused Moyka Purty. The impugned Judgment shows that the case of Mohan Purty was separated due to the fact that he was declared juvenile.