RAMAN LOHAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR NOW JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. K. MERATHIA, Prashant Kumar, JJ. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, gumla in Sessions Trial No. 289/93 whereby and where under he convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment.

(2.) THE case of prosecution in short is as per the fardbeyan of the informant PW5 is that on 23. 4. 1992, the appellant, his father ratiya Lohra and wife Kariyo Devi were in their house. On 24. 4. 1992 at about 3. 00 p. m. , he saw that the house of deceased Ratiya lohra was closed from outside. It is further stated that later on the informant and other villagers opened the door and entered inside the house and they found that Ratiya lohra, one of the deceased, was lying on the ground in unconscious condition whereas another deceased namely, Kariyo Devi was lying dead on a mat. It is further alleged that the informant and other villagers had found injury and thereafter they had been removed to hospital where the injured namely, Ratiya Lohra also died. It is alleged that Raman Lohra was not found in the house. It is further alleged that deceased kariyo Devi, who happened to be the wife of the appellant, was pregnant at that time and the appellant suspected that she became pregnant out of sexual relation with his younger brother and because of that there was strained relation between appellant and deceased.

(3.) ON the basis of aforesaid fardbeyan, a case vide Gumla P. S. Case No. 28 of 1992 dated 24. 4. 1992 was instituted and police took up investigation. After completing the investigation, police submitted charge-sheet against the appellant and on the basis of the same cognizance was taken against him for the offence under Section 302 of the indian Penal Code. It appears that since the case is exclusively triable by the Court of sessions, the case was committed to the court of Sessions. The charge under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was framed against the appellant and the same was explained to him to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereafter, the prosecution had examined altogether ten witnesses in support of its case and one witness was also examined as Court witness, who has proved postmortem report. It further appears that after hearing the counsel for the parties, the court below had convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid, against which this appeal has been filed.