) ------ Munda Tiu @ Kaira Tiu, son of Dagur Tiu @ Pandu, resident v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No.1198 of 2017 ------ (Arising out of judgment of conviction dated 24.05.2017 and order of sentence dated 25.05.2017 passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in Sessions Trial No.233 of 2016) ------ Munda Tiu @ Kaira Tiu, son of Dagur Tiu @ Pandu, resident of Village Tantnagar, Tola Batigutu, P.O. and P.S. Manjhari, District West Singhbhum, at Chaibasa. … … … Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … … Respondent ------ PRESENT : : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J. For the Appellant For the State : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl. P.P. ------ ------ J U D G M E N T By Court, : 18th October, 2024 This Criminal Appeal is preferred on behalf of the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 24.05.2017 and order of sentence dated 25.05.2017 passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, West Singhbhum at Chaibasa, in Sessions Trial No.233 of 2016, whereby and wherein the appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 302 I.P.C. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.20,000/- under Section 302 I.P.C. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Spl. P.P. for the State and perused the materials available on record. 3. Learned counsel representing the appellant submits that the appellant has been implicated in a false case on the basis of conjectures and surmises as there are no eye witness to the occurrence to prove the prosecution case. Learned counsel submitted that the appellant cannot be convicted on the basis of dying declaration given by the deceased as the same is highly suspicious and no corroborative evidence in support of 1 the same. 4. Learned Spl. P.P. representing the State vehemently opposes this Criminal Appeal and submits that the appellant has been rightly convicted in this case. She submits that the deceased himself stated in front of his daughter and wife that he saw this appellant by disclosing all his identity and his apparels, fleeing with sharp edged weapons in his hands after he got injured. She further submits that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses are consistent regarding the date, time and place of occurrence. She finally submits that the prosecution has been able to prove the charges levelled against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt and this Criminal Appeal is liable to be dismissed. 5. The crux of the case is that an F.I.R. came to be lodged at the instance of the informant namely Tulsi Purty, stating therein that one day prior to this fardbeyan i.e. on 06.09.2016 her father after having dinner went to sleep in a room along with her brother – Uday Purty. At midnight, her brother called her through mobile and told that someone with an intention to kill their father attacked him with sharp edged weapon causing grievous injury and large quantity of blood is oozing out. On hearing this, when the informant along with her mother and sister went at the place of occurrence, they saw her father writhing after sustaining grievous injury and blood was oozing out from his stomach and left elbow. After seeing this she got panicked and when she asked her injured father about who has done this, upon which her father told that he saw Munda Tiu of village running away with sharp edged weapon in his hands. He also saw Munda Tiu wearing a yellow colour’s nicker, a black ganji and covering his mouth with a towel (gamcha). After disclosing this, her father became unconscious. On hearing her mother’s cry, several villagers gathered and they took her father to Sadar Hospital, Chaibasa, where the Doctors declared her father dead. 6. On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant, the F.I.R. was lodged being Manjhari P.S. Case No.21 of 2016 under 2 Section 302 IPC. The cognizance of the offence was taken under Section 302 I.P.C. Thereafter, learned S.D.J.M., Sadar, Chaibasa, has committed the case to the Court of Sessions. Thereafter charge was framed against the appellant and on pleading not guilty and he was put on trial. 7. The prosecution has altogether examined 10 witnesses, statements of whom are hereunder:- P.W.-1 namely Uday Purty, is the son of the deceased. He deposed that on the date of incident he was sleeping near his father in a room. Suddenly at midnight at about 12:37 A.M. when he woke up, he saw that blood was oozing out from the stomach and hand of his father. He stated that his injured father has stated to his sister (informant) that Munda Tiu has injured him by a sharp edged weapon. P.W.-2 namely Tulsi Purty is the informant of this case. She deposed that on the date of incident she got a call from her brother telling her to come soon as someone is killing their father. When she reached there with her younger sister, she saw her father injured and blood was oozing out from his stomach and hand. Her father told her that one Munda Tiu of the Village has attacked him due to which he got injured. He told that Munda Tiu was wearing a yellow colour nicker, a black ganji and when he caught Munda Tiu, he attacked him on his hand by knife. Thereafter, she took her father to Sadar Hospital, Chaibasa, for treatment, where the Doctor declared him dead. She stated that the police recorded her fardbeyan, which was marked as Ext.-1. She also stated that she identified the appellant in the Court.
Legal Reasoning
informant, we find that the father of the informant was sleeping in a room when in the midnight he was attacked by a sharp edged weapon due to which he sustained grievous injuries. 11. When his daughter reached there and asked her injured father about the said incident, he named this appellant – Munda Tiu attacking and fleeing away with sharp edged weapon (knife) and when he tried to catch him, he attacked on his hand. Her father also disclosed he also saw Munda Tiu wearing a yellow colour’s nicker, a black ganji. Although, his dying declaration is before his family but, we do not find any force in the contention of learned counsel representing the appellant raising suspicion about the “dying declaration” of the deceased, as it is highly improbable that a person who has sustained grievous injuries and is on the verge of dying because of the said injury, would just take the name of any person, without any reason. The suspicion over the “dying declaration” also cannot survive on the point of having no other independent witness present with the deceased at the time of giving dying declaration, as it is certain that in the midnight at about 12 O’ Clock when the incident occurred, no one else could have been present except the family of the deceased. 5 12. From the evidence of the Doctor, it is clear that the death of the deceased occurred due to haemorrhage and shock due to the injuries inflicted by sharp cutting objects. Thus, the statement of the prosecution witnesses that they saw stab injuries on stomach and hand of the deceased, corroborates with the evidence of the Doctor who conducted post-mortem examination of the deceased. Further, the post-mortem examination report and the evidence of the Doctor establishes homicidal death. 13. Further, we find that P.W.-3 in her deposition has stated that the deceased has proceeded from his house in the evening along with the appellant for offering puja in the house of Raja Biruli. As per the statement of the appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the deceased was with the appellant till 10:30 P.M. in the said night. This statement was also corroborated by the oral testimony of P.W.-8. Thus, the deceased could easily identify the appellant as the assailant. 14. In this case, we find that though majority of the witness are interested witnesses who are related with the deceased, but their statement are consistent and corroborates with the evidences of each other. There is nothing to suggest that they are not reliable. Thus, the oral testimony of these witnesses cannot be discarded or suspected merely on the ground that they are interested witness. 15. As an upshot of the aforesaid fulcrum of facts, so also the “dying declaration” of the deceased identifying the appellant during his last breath as well as the post-mortem report revealing various grievous injuries sustained by the deceased caused by the sharp edged weapon (knife), we do not find it a fit case to acquit the appellant. The Trial Court also considered all these issues and has convicted the appellant. We find no ground to differ with the same. 16. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is dismissed sans any merit. The impugned judgment of conviction dated 24.05.2017 and order of sentence dated 25.05.2017 passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, West Singhbhum at 6 Chaibasa, in Sessions Trial No.233 of 2016, are hereby affirmed. 17. 18.
Arguments
P.W.-3 namely Smt. Joba @ Jambi Purty is the wife of the deceased. She deposed that her daughter told her that she got information from her brother about assault upon her father. On receiving this information, when she reached the place of occurrence, she saw that her husband was in an injured condition and blood was oozing out from stomach and hand. When her daughter asked her husband about the said incident, he told that one Munda Tiu of the Village had assaulted him. 3 Thereafter they took her husband to hospital where the Doctor has declared him dead. P.W.-4 namely Sukhmati Sinku is the daughter of the deceased. She also stated that she got information about assault upon her father and whey they reached there, she saw her father writhing. She saw that her father has sustained knife injury and blood was oozing out. Thereafore, during treatment in the hospital, her father died. P.W.-5 namely Bijay Singh Biruli, P.W.-6 namely Kaira Biruli, P.W.-7 namely Jogna Biruli and P.W.-8 namely Raja Biruli @ Sona Ram Biruli, have been declared hostile. P.W.-9 namely Bindeshwar Prasad, is the Investigating Officer of this case. He states that in the course of investigation he has inspected the place of occurrence and recorded the statements of prosecution witnesses namely Joba Purty, Sukhmati Purty, Vikay Singh Biruli, Kaira Biruli, Dadu Biruli, Jogna Biruli and Raja Biruli, in which they have supported the prosecution case. He has also identified several documentary evidences as exhibits. P.W.-10 namely Dr. Chandan Kumar Ravi, is the Doctor who conducted the post-mortem on the body of the deceased. He found following injuries:- i. Rigor mortise present in all four limbs. ii. Two stab wound. One in epigastric area, second wound in right hypochondria measuring 2 inches x ‰ inches x deep to the peritoneal cavity. On dissection i. Head and neck:- Skull bone, meninges intact, brain matter intact and pale. ii. Thorax:- Chest wall, ribs intact, both lungs intact and pale. Heart right chamber contains blood, left empty. iii. Abdomen:- Peritoneal cavity contains blood mixed up with food particles incised wound left lobe of liver and anterior wall of stomach. As per the Doctor, the cause of death is due to haemorrhage and shock caused by sharp cutting objects. 4 8. The prosecution has exhibited several documentary evidences, which are as follows:- i. Ext.1 ii. Ext.1/1 iii. Ext.1/2 iv. Ext.1/3 v. Ext.1/4 vi. Ext.2 vii. Ext.3 viii. Ext.4 ix. Ext.5 x. Ext.6 xi. Ext.7 Signature of Tulsi Purty on Fardbeyan Forwarding on Fardbeyan Forwarding :- :- Fardbeyan :- :- :- Registration on Fardbeyan :- :- :- :- Memo of Arrest of the accused :- Confessional Statement of accused Munda Tiu :- Signature of Tulsi Purty on Inquest Report Formal F.I.R. Inquest Report Postmortem Report 9. After the evidence of the prosecution, the statement of the appellant was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., in which he denied his guilt. However, he stated that he was with the deceased till 10:30 P.M. 10. From the fardbeyan and the evidence of the
Decision
Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of. Trial Court Record be transmitted back to the Court concerned. (ANANDA SEN, J.) (GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Dated:- 18/10/2024 NAFR / Prashant 7