Jharkhand High Court
Bijla Tigga vs The State Of Jharkhand on 14 July, 2022
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay, Ambuj Nath
Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 932 of 2015
[Against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated
29.11.2008 (sentence passed on 02.12.2008) passed by Md. Ashraf
Husain Ansari, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-V, Ranchi
in Sessions Trial No. 35 of 2007 ]
...........
Bijla Tigga, S/o Samu Tigga, R/o Village- Jamuni Toli, P.S.- Lapung, P.O.- Lapung, District- Ranchi, Jharkhand ... ... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... Respondent ...........
For the Appellant : Mr. Praful Jojo, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, A.P.P.
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
...........
08/14.07.2022 Heard Mr. Praful Jojo, learned counsel for the
appellant and Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 29.11.2008 (sentence passed on 02.12.2008) passed by Md. Ashraf Husain Ansari, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-V, Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 35 of 2007, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted for the offences u/s 302/34 and 201/34 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence u/s 302/34 of the IPC. No separate sentence for the offence u/s 201/34 of the IPC was awarded.
3. The fardbeyan of Samuel Lakra was recorded on 11.10.1989 at village Kurkuria, wherein it has been stated that on 08.10.1989 a Hockey match was organized between the teams of two villages namely Kurkuria and Kandarkel and the match was won by the team from Kurkuria. It has been alleged that in course of the match an altercation had taken place between the son of the informant namely Karlus and Markus Lakra. On the same day Karlus had gone to the market along with his co-villagers namely, Ignes Lakra, Robin Lakra Abhiram Lakra and others. The son of the informant however did not return at night and when the informant inquired about his son the following morning from the villagers Ignes Lakra had disclosed that at 7:15 P.M. the previous evening he was
-2- Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 932 of 2015 returning with Karlus from the market and when they had reached Kandarkel village Ignes had stopped for urinating while Karlus proceeded ahead. It has been alleged that when Ignes started following Karlus, Markus and Gandur had caught him and had left him after inflicting some fists blows. At the same time Bijla Tigga (appellant) and Jitram Tigga had caught hold of Karlus and were seen dragging him towards the village. On receiving such information from Ignes Lakra the informant had gone to the house of the persons who were involved in dragging his son but none were found present. In course of search on 11.10.1989, the dead body of the son of the informant was recovered from inside a well of village Kandarkel. It has been alleged that Markus Lakra, Gandur Lakra, Bijla Tigga and Jitram Tigga had committed the murder of the son of the informant by means of sharp cutting weapon.
Based on the aforesaid allegations Lapung P.S. Case No. 28/1989 was instituted for the offence u/s 302/201/34 of the I.P.C. On conclusion of investigation the first charge-sheet was submitted against Markus Lakra, Gandur Lakra and Jitan Baitha showing Bijla Tigga as an absconder and keeping the investigation open. After cognizance was taken the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and it was registered as S.T. No. 445/1991. Since the accused Bijla Tigga was absconding his record was split up and subsequently he was arrested and a supplementary charge-sheet was filed after which his case was committed separately and was registered as S.T. No. 35 of 2007. Charge was framed u/s 302/34 and 201 of the I.P.C. which was read over and explained to the accused Bijla Tigga in Hindi to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
4. The prosecution has examined as many as four witnesses in support of its case.
5. P.W.1 (Ignes Lakra) is a villager who had accompanied the deceased Karlus when he was returning from the market. This witness has deposed that there was a Hockey match
-3- Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 932 of 2015 on 08.10.1989 between the teams of the villages Kurkuria and Kandarkel and while the match was in progress an altercation had taken place between Karlus Lakra and Markus Lakra. He has also stated that in the evening, he along with Karlus, Bira Lakra, Robin and Stanish Lakra had gone to Kurkuria market and when they were returning at about 7:15 P.M. near village Kandarkel, he went to urinate while Karlus proceeded ahead. He has further stated that while he was following Karlus, he had seen the accused Bijla Tigga and Jitram catching hold of Karlus and when this witness had reached the said place he was assaulted by Gandur and Markus Lakra and thereafter all the accused persons had forcibly taken Karlus to their village. This witness has deposed that on account of rains, he could not inform the incident to the father of Karlus. He has also deposed that after three days the dead body of the deceased was recovered from a well and cut injuries were also found on various parts of his body. This witness has proved his signature in his 164 Cr.P.C. statement and the same is marked as Exhibit-1.
In cross-examination, he has deposed that he was not present at the time when altercation had taken place between Karlus and Markus during the Hockey match and he reached the said place after the game was over.
6. P.W.2 (Augustus Lakra) is a villager who has deposed that on 08.10.1989 the teams from the villages Kurkuria and Kandarkel had a Hockey match and in course of the match an altercation had taken place between Karlus and Bijla Tigga. He has deposed that there was heavy rain on that day and he came back to his house. On the next morning, from Ignes Lakra he came to know that the accused Bijla Tigga, Markus and two others had taken Karlus forcibly towards their village and Bijla Tigga had inflicted two-three fist blows to Ignes and had ordered him to leave the place silently. This witness has also deposed that on this information, he along with the informant and other persons went
-4- Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 932 of 2015 to the village of the accused persons but none were found present. This witness was present when the dead body was recovered from the well and had seen the injuries inflicted by spade on the dead body. He has proved his signature in the inquest report which has been marked as Exhibit-2.
7. P.W.3 (Samuel Lakra) is the informant as well as the father of the deceased who has stated that a Hockey match was in progress between the teams of Kurkuria village and Kandarkel village. The match was won by the team of Kurkuria in which the son of the informant was also a team member. On conclusion of the match there was a quarrel between both the sides and ultimately the players had dispersed. He has stated that while returning from the market his son was accompanied by Ignes (P.W.1) and when they reached near village Kandarkel he was accosted by Bijla, Markus Gandur and Jitram. His son did not return home for which a search was conducted and the house of the accused persons were also visited but none were found present. He has also stated that on the third day, the dead body of his son was found on a well beside village Kandarkel. He had observed axe cut injury on the chest, shoulder and neck of the dead body which was immersed by tying it up with a heavy stone. He has proved his signature on the fardbeyan which has been marked as Exhibit-6.
In his cross-examination, he has stated that he had not witnessed the occurrence. He has further stated that he had deposed whatever has been confided to him by Ignes.
8. P.W.4 (Dr. Saroj Kumar) is a Medical Officer who was posted in the Department of Forensic Medicine, R.M.C.H., Ranchi and on 12.10.1989, he had conducted autopsy on the dead body of Karlus Lakra and had found the following injuries:
(i) 12 x 2 c.m. on left side of maxillary region cutting the underlying bone completely.
(ii) 7 x 2 c.m. on left eye-brow cutting the left frontal bone completely.
(iii) 14 x 2 c.m. over bridge of nose and adjoining
-5- Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 932 of 2015 both zygomatic regions situated horizontally cutting underlying bone.
(iv) 12 x 2 c.m. on left side of maxillary region cutting the underlying bone completely.
(v) 14 x 2 c.m. over front of neck situated transversely cutting soft tissue, blood vessel, trachea and esophagus.
(vi) 5 x 1½ c.m. on right chest front situated ½ c.m.
right to midline cutting 3rd to 6th right coastal cart ledge partially.
He has opined that all the injuries found were antemortem in nature caused by heavy sharp cutting weapon. He has also opined that the time since death was 2 to 5 days from the postmortem examination. He has proved the postmortem report which is in his handwriting and bears his signature and which has been marked as Exhibit-4.
9. The statement of the appellant was recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. in which he has merely denied about his involvement in the offence.
10. Mr. Praful Jojo, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that there are no eye-witnesses to the occurrence. It has further been submitted that whatever P.W.2 and P.W.3 have deposed is based on the purported disclosure made by P.W.1 to them. Learned counsel while drawing the attention of the Court to the evidence of P.W.1 submits that the appellant was said to be one of the persons who had taken away the deceased towards the village but the same has not been corroborated by any independent witness and in fact the dead body was recovered after almost three days from inside the well. It further more reveals that there was no close proximity between the son of the informant having been taken away by the accused persons and the recovery of the dead body after three days.
11. Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, learned A.P.P. has opposed the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant by submitting that the evidence of P.W.1 is trustworthy and reliable and since the body of the son of the informant was
-6- Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 932 of 2015 recovered after three days from the date when he was forcibly taken away by the accused persons the same clearly reveals about the involvement of the appellant in committing the murder of Karlus. Learned counsel further submits that the appellant had completed a period more than 16 years in custody and by virtue of the order passed by the State Sentence Review Board the appellant has been released from custody on 21.05.2022.
12. We have heard the learned counsels for the respective parties and have also perused the Lower Court Records.
The fardbeyan of the informant has been recorded on account of the son of the informant who had gone with the appellant and others having disappeared. In fact, none of the three witnesses examined by the prosecution are the eye-witnesses and it is only P.W.1 (Ignes Lakra) who is said to have seen the accused persons dragging away the son of the informant towards their village. The incident is said to have taken place in the evening of 08.10.1989 but P.W.1 had never informed the father of the informant or had informed any other person or shown any urgency and had subsequently in the next morning informed P.W.3 about the incident which resulted in a search conducted for finding out the whereabouts of the son of the informant. So far as the present appellant is concerned, he is said to have caught hold of the deceased and thereafter all the four accused persons including the appellant had taken away the deceased towards their village. There does not seem to be any allegation of committing assault upon the deceased by the appellant in the presence of P.W.1 and a suspicion was raised that the incident had taken place on account of both the teams in the Hockey match being embroiled in a quarrel. It also appears that the dead body of the son of the informant was recovered after three days from inside a well and sharp cutting wounds were found on his person. There was no close proximity with respect to the taking away of the son of the informant by the accused persons and the subsequent recovery of his dead body
-7- Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 932 of 2015 from inside the well. It appears that the Investigating Officer of the case has also not been examined. There also does not appear to be any incriminating materials recovered from the appellant or any other material or substance which would indicate about the appellant being involved in the commission of murder of the son of the informant.
13. As noted above, the evidence of P.W.2 and P.W.3 is basically a replica of what has been narrated to them by P.W.1 and in absence of there being any corroboration, the evidence of P.W.1 cannot be fully relied upon in order to convict the appellant.
14. Accordingly, in view of what has been discussed above, we are inclined to allow this appeal. This appeal is allowed and the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 29.11.2008 (sentence passed on 02.12.2008) passed by Md. Ashraf Husain Ansari, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-V, Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 35 of 2007, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted for the offences u/s 302/34 and 201/34 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence u/s 302/34 of the IPC is hereby set aside.
15. Since it has been submitted by the learned A.P.P. that the appellant has already been granted remission and released pursuant to the order of the State Sentence Review Board, no further order on the point of release is necessitated.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) (Ambuj Nath, J.) High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Dated, the 14th day of July, 2022.
Alok/NAFR