Jharkhand High Court
Pila Pahan And Others vs The State Of Jharkhand on 5 February, 2013
Author: D.N.Patel
Bench: D.N.Patel, Shree Chandrashekhar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 764 of 2012
1. Pila Pahan
2. Anmol Pahan
3. Anup Kerketta ... ... Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Respondent
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.PATEL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR
------
For the Appellant: Ms. J. Mazumdar
For the Respondents: Mr. Vibhuti Shankar Sahay
-----
09/Dated 5th February, 2013
1. Present appeal has already been admitted vide order dated 31st July, 2013. Record and proceedings of S.T. No. 100/2009 was called for from the trial court so as to appreciate the arguments on the prayer for suspension of sentence under section 389 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. The present appellants have been convicted vide order dated 12th June, 2012 in S.T. No. 100 of 2009 by Pr. Sessions Judge, Simdega and they were sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for life under section 302/34 of the I.P.C.
3. Records and proceedings of S.T. No. 100 of 2009 have been received and we have perused the same.
4. Having heard counsel for both sides and looking to the evidences on record, it appears that there is prima-facie case against these appellants. As the criminal appeal is pending, we are not much inclined to analyse the evidences on record, but suffice it to say that case of the prosecution is based upon more than one eye witness, i.e. P.W. 4 and P.W.5. and looking to their depositions, it appears that they have clearly narrated the role played by these appellants and the manner of causing injury upon the body of the deceased. Their depositions have also got further corroboration from the deposition of P.W. 3 and P.W.6 (informant of this case). P.W. 8 is Dr. Om Prakash Rawani, who conducted post- mortem examination of the body of the deceased and proved the post- mortem report. As per the post mortem report, there are several injuries -2- upon the body of the deceased caused by Lathi blows and Lathi is the weapon, which allegedly was in the hand of the appellants as per the eye witnesses. Therefore, evidence of the eye witnesses is further corroborated by the medical evidence. These evidences together, are constituting a prima-facie case against these appellants and hence, looking to these evidences on record and looking to the gravity of offence, the quantum of punishment and the manner in which the appellant is involved in the offence, as alleged by the prosecution, we are not inclined to suspend the sentence, awarded by the trial court, to the present appellants.
6. There is no substance in the prayer for suspension of sentence, which is accordingly rejected.
(D.N.Patel, J.) (Shree Chandrashekhar, J.) s.m.