Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 270 of 1999 (R) Against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 19.08.1999 passed by Shri Ram Prabodh Singh, learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Chaibasa in S. T. No. 89 of 1995. --- 1. Rasika Kondonkel s/o Gura Kondonkel 2. Gura Kondonkel @ Motu Kondonkel S/o Late Hurdu Kondonkel Resident of Village Baihatu Tola, Dhipasai, PS Nimardungi, District Singhbhum-West … … Appellants Versus 1. The State of Bihar (now Jharkhand) 2. Jagarnath Behra S/o Late Karni Nath Behra, Resident of Village Baihatu Tola, Dhipasai, PS Nimardungi, District Singhbhum-West … … Respondents For the Appellant : Mr. Tarun Kumar Mahto, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, A.P.P. --- Present: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI --- Per, R. Mukhopadhyay, J. 11.03.2025 Heard Mr. Tarun Kumar Mahto, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 19.08.1999 passed by Shri Ram Prabodh Singh, learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Chaibasa in S. T. No. 89 of 1995 whereby and whereunder the appellants have been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of I.P.C. and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. 3. The fard beyan of Jagarnath Behra was recorded on 12.08.1994 in which it has been stated that on the same day, the informant had gone to Kumardungi Block Office and at about 1:00 P.M., one Singa Bage informed him at Santosh Hotel that the brother of the informant namely, Ram Prasad Behra has been assaulted by some villagers and he was lying injured in the house. When the informant reached his house, he found his brother lying on the cot with multiple injuries on his person. The brother-in-law of the informant namely, Haripado Yadav has disclosed to the mother and wife of the informant about the assault committed upon the brother of the informant by Rasika 2 Kondankel and Gura Kondankel. The informant had taken his brother to the hospital, where the doctor declared him dead. Based on the aforesaid allegations, Majhgaon (Kumardungi) P. S. Case No. 39 of 1994 was instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of I.P.C. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted and after cognizance was taken, the case was committed to the court of Sessions where it was registered as S. T. No. 89 of 1995. Chage was framed under Section 302/34 of I.P.C. which was read over and explained to the accused persons in Hindi to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. The prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses in support of its case. 5. P.W. 1 – Rupchand Behra has stated that on 12.08.1994 at noon, he was in the betel shop at Kumardungi, when a person namely, Singa Bage had come from the village and informed him that his brother has been assaulted with lathi and is lying in a pool of blood. At this information, he went home and found his brother lying in an injured condition on a cot. His brother was unconscious and there was an injury on the back of his head. He and the others had taken his brother to Kumardungi State Dispensary where doctor declared him dead. Thereafter, he had gone to the police station to inform about the incident. When he had gone to his house to see his injured brother, his brother-in- law Haripado Yadav has disclosed that both the accused persons had assaulted his brother with lathi. The reason for assault is that an altercation has taken place between the deceased and the accused, since the deceased had gone to the house of the accused persons with the goats of the accused which were feeding on the paddy in the field of his brother (deceased). In cross-examination, he has deposed that on information received from Singa Bage, when he reached his house apart from others, Haripado Yadav was also present. After about 15 minutes, his elder brother – Jagarnath Behra reached with Videshi Munda. The injured was taken to 3 the hospital in a truck. In the hospital, the police has recorded the statement of Jagarnath Behra only. He has not witnessed the assault. 6. P.W. 2 – Jagarnath Behra is the informant who has proved his signature in the fard beyan which has been marked as Exhibit 1. He has stated that on 12.08.1994 at 12:00 noon, he was having lunch at Santosh Hotel in Kumardungi Block when Singa Bage informed him that his brother has been assaulted and the villagers had assaulted him. He reached to his house on a motor-cycle with Videshi Munda and on reaching he found his brother lying in a pool of blood on the cot with an injury on the back of his head. His mother Sukanti Devi and wife Bhanumati Devi and brother-in-law Haripado Yadav had disclosed that the goats of the accused were eating paddy and when this was complained by the deceased along with Haripado Yadav, the accused had committed assault upon the deceased. His brother was taken on a truck to the hospital where the doctor declared him dead. In cross-examination, he has stated that the initial information about the assault was given to him by Singa Bage. He had not witnessed the incident. 7. P.W. 3 – Haripado Yadav has stated that on 12.08.1994 at 12:30 P.M., he after having lunch at his in-laws’ place had gone to watch the field along with his brother-in-law Ram Prasad Behra. When they saw goats eating away the paddy, the goats were chased off by them and they followed the goats to verify as to who are their owners. The goats had led them to the house of Motu Kondankel where his brother-in-law complained to them about letting the goats wandering around and in the meantime, Rasika Kondankel caught hold of his brother-in-law. Motu Kondankel gave a blow on the back side of the head with the wooden handle of the kudal at which Ram Prasad Behra fell down on the ground and when he was trying to take away Ram Prasad Behra, he was chased away by the accused persons armed with lathi. When he raised an alarm, several persons assembled, who carried away Ram Prasad to the house and laid him under the Tamarind tree on a cot. He has gone with Singa Bage on his motor-cycle and when he reached Kumardungi, he 4 found his brother-in-law Jagarnath Behra having food at Santosh Hotel. When the incident was narrated to him, Ram Prasad Behra was taken on truck to Kumardungi hospital, where the doctor declared him dead. In cross-examination, he has stated that after half an hour of the incident, Singa Bage came. 8. P.W. 4 – Dr. Jawahar Khan was posted as Civil Assistant Surgeon, Sadar Hospital, Chaibasa and has proved the post mortem report which has been marked as Exhibit 2. In cross-examination, he has deposed that the autopsy was not done in his presence and Exhibit 2 was also not prepared in his presence. 9. P.W. 5 – Dular Chand Pandey was posted as an Officer-in- Charge of Kumardungi Police Station and on 12.08.1994, he had received an information that a person in an injured condition had gone for treatment to Kumardungi Police Station. At this, he went to the hospital and came to know that Ram Prasad Behra has been declared dead by the doctor. The brother of the deceased – Jagarnath Behra who was present in the hospital had disclosed that the accused persons had committed assault upon Ram Prasad Behra leading to his death. He has proved the fard beyan of Jagarnath Behra which has been marked as Exhibit 1. He has proved the formal FIR which has been marked as Exhibit 3. He had recorded the re-statement of the informant and also recorded the statement of the witnesses. He had inspected the place of occurrence which was the Neem tree adjacent to the house of the accused. He had obtained the post mortem report and on completion of investigation had submitted charge-sheet. In cross-examination, he has deposed that neither he had seized any article from the place of occurrence nor the blood-stained earth. The statement of Haripado Yadav was recorded late as he was not being traced out. 10. P.W. 6 – Shankar Lal Chiranya has proved the inquest report which has been marked as Exhibit 4. 11. The statements of the accused persons were recorded under 5 Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which they have denied their complicity in the murder. 12. It has been submitted by Mr. Tarun Kumar Mahto, learned counsel for the appellants that though P.W. 3 claims himself to be an eye- witness, but his evidence is riddled with contradictions. One of the main witnesses Singa Bage has not been examined by the prosecution. It has been submitted that no incriminating article has been seized either from the place of occurrence or from the appellants. 13. Submission has been advanced by the learned A.P.P. that the appellants without any provocation had committed assault upon Ram Prasad Behra and the evidence of P.W. 3 is a pointer to the involvement of the appellant in committing the murder. 14. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective sides and have also perused the trial court records. 15. The paddy belonging to the deceased being eaten away by the goats of the accused persons led to a confrontation and apparently the appellant no. 1 had caught hold of Ram Prasad Behra while the appellant no. 2 struck him on the back of his head with the wooden side of kudal and Ram Prasad Behra fell on the ground and had ultimately died. P.W. 3 claims himself to be an eye-witness as he had accompanied Ram Prasad Behra to the house of the appellants. P.W. 3 has stated that when he raised a cry of distress, his parents-in-law and other relatives from the house of Ram Prasad Behra assembled and they had carried Ram Prasad Behra to his house, where he was laid on a cot beneath a Tamarind tree. However, none of the persons who had reached the place of occurrence has been examined by the prosecution. P.W. 3 further claims to have informed the P.W. 2 (informant) who was having food at Santosh Hotel about the incident, but the evidence of P.W. 2 speaks otherwise as he has not even whispered about the presence of P.W. 3 in the hotel where he was having his food; rather he had taken the name of Singa Bage as the person who had informed him about the incident. P.W. 1 who is another brother-in-law has also been informed by Singa Bage about the incident. There appears to be a common thread between 6 P.W. 1 and P.W. 2 regarding Singa Bage as a provider of the information, but the said person has also not been examined by the prosecution. Though, P.W. 3 claims that he had gone to the field of Ram Prasad Behra after having lunch at his in-laws’ place, but neither P.W. 1 nor P.W. 2 have even given a hint of such assertion. Another view of P.W. 3 which assumes considerably importance is that though P.W. 3 claims to have informed P.W. 2 about the incident, but when P.W. 2 rushed to his house, P.W. 3 was already present and the incident was disclosed to him by P.W. 3 and the wife and mother of P.W. 2 which would mean that P.W. 3 had already informed the wife and mother of P.W. 2 prior to the arrival of P.W. 2 which again speaks of a doubt in the case of the prosecution. In fact, the presence of P.W. 3 in the house of the in-laws’ has also been reiterated by P.W. 1. It also seems that no blood-stained earth was seized or any incriminating article was recovered and this also creates a grave doubt over the place of occurrence as projected by the P.W. 3. P.W. 3 is at the centre stage of the prosecution case, but his evidence as we have noted above cannot be the basis of conviction of the appellants, in view of its inherent flaws and contradictions as also being not supported by any independent witnesses and thus considering the overall panorama of the case, the appellants are hereby acquitted from the charges levelled against them. We therefore, on the basis of the discussions made hereinabove, set aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 19.08.1999 passed by Shri Ram Prabodh Singh, learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Chaibasa in S. T. No. 89 of 1995 16. This appeal is allowed. 17. Since the appellants are on bail, they are discharged from the liabilities of their bail bonds. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) (Arun Kumar Rai, J.) Jharkhand High Court at Ranchi The 11th day of March, 2025 R.Shekhar/NAFR/Cp.3