) ------ Felia Bilung @ Filix Bilung, son of Patras Bilung, resident of Village v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No.1284 of 2003 ------ (Arising out of judgment of conviction dated 14.08.2001 and order of sentence dated 16.08.2001 passed by Learned Sessions Judge, Gumla, in Sessions Trial No.140 of 1999) ------ Felia Bilung @ Filix Bilung, son of Patras Bilung, resident of Village Manjha Toli, Police Station Raidih, District Gumla. … … … Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … … Respondent ------ PRESENT : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. : SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J. For the Appellant : Ms. Riya Narayan, Advocate (Amicus Curiae) For the State : Ms. Priya Shrestha, Spl. P.P. ------ ------ J U D G M E N T By Court, : 29th November, 2024 This Criminal Appeal has been preferred through the Jail Authorities, on behalf of the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction dated 14.08.2001 and order of sentence dated 16.08.2001 passed by Learned Sessions Judge, Gumla, in Sessions Trial No.140 of 1999, whereby and wherein the appellant has been convicted for offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 I.P.C. 2. Heard learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and learned Spl. A.P.P. for the State and perused the materials available on record. 3.
Legal Reasoning
On factual dissection of the case in hand, we find that there are five eye-witnesses to the occurrence i.e. P.W.-1 namely Leo Kiro, P.W.-2 namely Domnik Kiro, P.W.-3 namely Peter Paul Kindo, P.W.-5 namely Libnus Kiro, P.W.-6 namely Theodor Kerketta. All of them in their statement and cross-examination have stated that they were the part of the meeting beneath the Banyan tree on the issue of saving the mangoes from plucking. About 15 persons were present there. The deceased was in favour to save the mangoes which everyone supported but Filix wanted to pluck the mango in order to sell it. The deceased tried to make Filix understand but he acted stubborn and with the edge of tabli / tangi (axe) in his hand, assaulted the deceased on his back, shoulder two times and ran away. The deceased fell down and 6 blood started oozing out. The informant who is the son of the deceased came to whom the deceased narrated about the assault being made by Filix with tangi and told him to take him to hospital. The deceased got expired on the way to hospital near Karanjtoli. When they were returning while taking back the dead body of the deceased to home, they found the tangi smeared with blood from the bushes which they submitted before the police. We find these witnesses reliable. The murder weapon i.e. axe was also recovered and proved by the Investigating Officer. 10. The argument of learned Amicus Curiae to bring the guilt of this appellant within the ambit of Section 304 Part-II IPC cannot be sustained inasmuch as the appellant had assaulted with the sharp edge of the tangi (axe) that too twice, which is evident from the statement of P.W.-2, which itself indicates his intention to give fatal blow to the deceased. If he had no intention to kill the deceased, he could have hit by the wooden handle attached to the sharp edged iron or from the blunt side of the axe, but he choose to hit the deceased with the sharp edged area twice knowing fully well that the deceased is not going to survive after sustaining the injury. 11. The post-mortem report of the Doctor suggests that brutal assault with the sharp cutting weapon has led to his death. There were two incised wounds found on the body of the deceased. The statement of all the eye-witnesses stands corroborated with the evidence of this P.W.-4, who is the Doctor, as they have stated in their statement that the appellant mercilessly assaulted the deceased by tangi twice. Thus, in this case, Section 300 IPC is attracted which is punishable under Section 302 IPC. 12. The above points, that we have culled out from the aforesaid fulcrum of facts, make it clear that the learned Trial Court has done a very elaborate exercise in coming to the conclusion of guilt against the appellant under Section 302 IPC. Thus, we find no merit in this appeal. The impugned judgment of conviction dated 14.08.2001 and order of sentence dated 16.08.2001 passed by Learned Sessions Judge, Gumla, in 7 Sessions Trial No.140 of 1999, are hereby affirmed. Accordingly, this Criminal Appeal is dismissed. Since the appellant is on bail, his bail is cancelled and he is directed to surrender before the Trial Court to serve the rest of the sentence. If he does not surrender, the Trial Court is directed to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. 13. Trial Court Record be transmitted back to the Court concerned. 14. 15.
Arguments
Ms. Riya Narayan, learned Amicus Curiae representing the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case inasmuch as the prosecution witnesses cited in this case are all interested witnesses being in relation with the deceased and they are not independent witnesses. She further submits that on the basis of uncorroborated testimony of interested witnesses, the conviction of accused is highly 1 prejudicial. She submits that the appellant had no intention to commit murder of the deceased as the altercation took place in a heat of passion and there were many people gathered at the place of occurrence. Thus, at best the case against the appellant may be of Section 304 Part-II IPC. 4. Per contra, Ms. Priya Shrestha, learned Spl. P.P. representing the State vehemently opposes the Criminal Appeal and submits that there is no infirmity in the judgment of the Trial Court convicting and sentencing the appellant for the reason that there is consistent statement of the prosecution witnesses who are reliable eye-witnesses to the incident as they have stated about each and every details of the incident. Their statements also found corroborated with the post-mortem report of the Doctor, which proves the assault and grievous injuries caused by the axe sufficient to cause death in ordinary course. The Investigating Officer also found the blood stained axe, marked as material Ext-II. She states that looking to the seriousness of offence and the brutal act of the appellant resulting in death of father of the informant, he does not deserve to be acquitted and the instant Criminal Appeal is liable to be dismissed. 5. The case of the prosecution on the basis of written report of the informant – Benedik Kido, is that on 22.05.1999 at about 04:00 P.M., one Libnus Kido came to his house and told him that Filix Bilung assaulted his father with tabli / kulhari (axe), near the Banyan tree. On hearing this, when the informant went near his father, he saw that there were two injury marks of tabli (axe) at the bottom of the neck of his father and blood was oozing out in large quantity. Lew Kido, Domnik Kido, Paul Kido and other persons were also present near his father. He heard his father groaning that Filix Bilung assaulted him by tabli / kulhari (axe). He with the help of villagers loaded his father on a cot to take him for treatment but when they reached near Karanjtoli, they found his father dead. The informant sent the villagers with the body of his father to village and himself went to the Police Station to give the information. He stated that his father has been murdered by Filix Bilung by tabli / kulhari (axe) because his 2 father forbade him to pluck the mango from mango tree. 6. On the basis of the aforesaid written report, F.I.R. being Raidih P.S. Case No.15/1999 was registered under Section 302 IPC and charge sheet was also filed under Section 302 IPC. Thereafter, cognizance under Section 302 IPC was taken against the appellant and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. As the appellant pleaded not guilty, charge was framed under Section 302 IPC and the appellant was put on trial. 7. To prove the prosecution case, the prosecution has examined altogether 09 prosecution witnesses:- a) P.W.-1 namely Leo Kiro deposed that he was sitting with the villagers beneath the Banyan tree and there were discussions going on that the mangoes should be saved from plucking. About 15 persons were present there including the deceased – Lajrus Kiro, he himself, Paul, Domni, Librus etc. Filix was also there. The deceased spoke of saving the mango which everyone supported but Filix was adamant to pluck the mango. The deceased tried to make him understand that saving the mango is very essential but Filix did not understand and with the edge of tabli (axe) in his hand, hit the deceased and ran away. The deceased fell down and blood started oozing out. He tied the injury with his towel to stop the flow of blood. Lijrus went to inform this incident to the house of the deceased. Then his son Benedik came, the deceased told him that Filix assaulted him by tangi and told him to take to hospital. Then they loaded him on a cot for taking him to the hospital but on the way near Karanjtoli, he expired. He in his cross-examination, submitted that when they were returning while taking back the dead body of the deceased to home, they found the tangi smeared with blood from the bushes which they submitted before the police. b) P.W.-2 namely Domnik Kiro stated that he was also sitting beneath the Banyan tree when a meeting to save the mangoes was going on, where Thaoda and Filix also participated in the said meeting and told that they will pluck the mangoes and sell it, which was opposed by the deceased. Then Filix assaulted the deceased by tangi on his back two times due to which the 3 deceased fell on his face and blood started oozing from the injury. Thereafter Filix fled away. After some time, on the way to hospital near Karanjtoli, the deceased died. They found the tangi from the bushes and gave it to the police. In his cross-examination, he stated that Filix assaulted the deceased on his back with the sharp edged side of the tangi resulting in injuries on his back. c) P.W.-3 namely Peter Paul Kindo, deposed exactly what P.W.-1 and P.W.-2 have deposed in their depositions, whether it is place of occurrence, or the subject of altercation i.e. to save the mango, or assault being made by Filix to the deceased by bada tangi (axe), or calling his son with whom the deceased was being taken to hospital and near Karanjtoli he expired. In his cross- examination, his statement regarding assault of tangi by Filix to the deceased remained unshaken. d) P.W.-4 namely Dr. Hemant Kumar, is the Doctor who conducted the post-mortem on the body of the deceased. He found following injuries:- 1. Incised wound size 5” x 2” x 4” over left side of back transverse in direction with fracture of thoracic to vertebra scapula also cut, spinal code cut. 2. Incised wound size 5” x 2” x 4” over middle of back transverse in direction with fracture of thoracic vertebra. Scapula bone spinal cord also cut, right lung also cut, blood present in thoracic cavity. The Doctor opined that the injuries were antemortem in nature, both injuries were caused by sharp cutting weapon like (tabli) tangi. He also opined that both injuries were grievous in nature and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature either singly or in combination. e) P.W.-5 namely Libnus Kiro also stated exactly what P.W.-1, P.W.-2 and P.W.-3 have deposed in their depositions. In his cross-examination, his statement regarding assault of tangi by Filix to the deceased remained consistent. f) P.W.-6 namely Theodor Kerketta also deposed that a meeting was going on in the village near the Banyan tree to save the mangoes. He stated that Lajrus was in favour to save the 4 mango but Filix was adamant to pluck the mango and sell it in the market due to which altercation took place and Filix assaulted the deceased with tangi (axe) due to which the deceased fell down and blood started oozing. Thereafter son of the informant also came there and on the way to hospital, the deceased succumbed to his injuries. His statement in his cross-examination remained consistent. g) P.W.-7 namely Benedik Kido is the informant of this case. He deposed that on 22.05.1999 his father had gone to attend a meeting in connection with mango. At about 04:00 P.M., Libnus Kiro came to his house and told him that Filix Bilung has assaulted his father, whereupon he went to his father and saw that blood was oozing out from the neck of his father. His father told him that that Filix Bilung assaulted him by tabli / kulhari (axe). He with the help of Lew Kiro, Domnik Koro, Paul Kiro and other persons who were also present near his father, carried his father on cot for treatment but when they reached half way, they found his father dead. Thereafter, the informant reached Police Station to give information. His statement remained consistent in his cross-examination also. h) P.W.-8 namely Pramod Ranjan is the Investigating Officer of this case. He stated that he had proved the written report of the informant and the same was received in the Police Station. He stated that the F.I.R. was proved by him. He during investigation, inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the sketch map of the place of occurrence. He also prepared the inquest report. He also collected blood stained earth from the place of occurrence and prepared seizure list. He stated that during investigation, the blood stained axe was produced. He sent the blood stained earth, axe and small pieces of cloth to Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. i) P.W.-9 namely Shailendra Kumar Sinha is an Assistant of Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Ranchi. He deposed that in the laboratory, three sealed packets in connection with Raidih P.S. Case No.15/99 was received. One packet contains sandy earth which was stained with blood, the second packet contains 5 blood stain axe (kulhari) and third packet contains two small pieces of cloth. On the basis of aforesaid articles, the report was prepared. 8. Several documentary evidences and materials have also been produced and exhibited, which are as follows:- i. Ext.1 ii. Ext.1/1 :- :- seizure list :- iii. Ext.1/2 Signature of Leo Kindo on Seizure list. Signature of Domnik Kido on the said signature of Leo Kindo on carbon copy of inquest report iv. Ext.1/3 :- Signature of Domnik Kindo on said inquest report v. Ext.1/4 vi. Ext.1/5 :- :- Signature of Leo Kindo on Seizure list. Signature of Domnik Kindo on said Seizure list. vii. Ext.2 viii. Ext.3 ix. Ext.4 x. Ext.5 xi. Ext.6 xii. Ext.7 xiii. Ext.8 xiv. Ext.8/1 xv. Ext.9 Postmortem report. :- :- Written report Endorsement on fardbeyan :- Formal F.I.R. :- Sketch Map :- Inquest Report :- Seizure list :- :- Seizure list-cum-production list :- Carbon copy of forwarding to test of Forensic xvi. Ext.10 xvii. Mat. Ext.1 :- xviii. Mat. Ext.2 :- xix. Mat. Ext.3 :- :- Report of FSL Ranchi Blood stained soil Blood stained tangi small blood stained cloth 9.
Decision
Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of. Considering the sincere efforts put in by learned counsel Ms. Riya Narayan, Amicus Curiae in assisting the Court, for the disposal of this Appeal, we direct the Jharkhand High Court Legal Services Committee to pay a remuneration of Rs.7,500/- to Ms. Riya Narayan, Advocate (Amicus Curiae). (ANANDA SEN, J.) (GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.) HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Dated:- 29/11/2024 NAFR / Prashant 8