Jharkhand High Court
Aghanu Manjhi vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 January, 2012
Author: R. K. Merathia
Bench: R. K. Merathia, D. N. Upadhyay
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1638 of 2003
Against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence
dated 29.07.2003 & 30.07.2003 respectively, passed by
learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.5,
Hazaribag in Sessions Trial No. 340 of 2001 arising out of
Mandu (Kujju) P.S. Case No.378 of 2000 corresponding to
G.R. Case No.2723 of 2000.
Aghanu Manjhi ..... ...... ..... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ...... ... Opposite Party
----
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. K. MERATHIA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. UPADHYAY
For the Appellant : Mr. Gopal Krishna Sinha &
Mr. Devesh Krishna, Advocates
For the State : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, A.P.P.
----
By Court: This appeal has been filed against the judgment, convicting
the appellant under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs.200/-. The appellant has also been convicted for the offence under Section 201 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six years and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- and in default thereof to undergo R.I. for two months. The sentences were directed to run concurrently.
2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 05.12.2000 PW-1 Pancham Mistri lodged a fardbeyan that his brother-in-law Puni Karmali who was living with him went out of the house for market on 08.11.2000. When he did not return, the informant and others started searching him. In course of search they went to village of Puni Karmali but nothing could be learnt. Thereafter, it was learnt that on 08.11.2000 in the market the deceased was seen with the appellant. The informant and others went to the village of the appellant and learnt that for about 10-15 days he was not in the village but he was seen on 08.11.2000 with the deceased. Then the informant along with PW-4 Surmal Kumar (PW-4), one Khedan Saw, Arjun Saw and others went to the village of the appellant on 05.12.2000 and brought him to their village on the pretext that his father-in-law was ill. It is further alleged that when appellant was asked about the deceased, he confessed that he along with 2-3 others has murdered the deceased because the 2. deceased had talked in bad language with the daughter of one Ganesh. The appellant pointed out that he has concealed the dead body under the soil in the jungle. On this the villagers assaulted him causing injuries, then the police came there and the fardbeyan was recorded.
3. Mr. Gopal Krishna Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant assailed the judgment on various grounds and on the other hand the counsel for the State supported it.
4. There is no eye witness in this case. As per the prosecution case, the appellant was last seen with the deceased in the market about 26 days back. There is nothing on record to show that any information was given to the police if the deceased was traceless from 08.11.2000 within a reasonable time. The fardbeyan was lodged after about 26 days on 05.12.2000. Even as per the fardbeyan the appellant was beaten by the villagers and on his confession the dead body of Puni Karmali (deceased) was recovered. In our opinion, the appellant can not be convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. even if such confession leading to recovery of the dead body is accepted.
5. In the circumstances, the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 302 I.P.C. is set aside, however, his conviction and sentence under Section 201 I.P.C. is maintained. It was informed that the appellant has already served the sentence under Section 201 I.P.C. Accordingly, he is not required to deposit the fine imposed on that account by the trial Court and should be released from jail, if not wanted in any other case.
6. In the result, this appeal is partly allowed with modification in the conviction and sentence.
(R. K. Merathia, J.) (D. N. Upadhyay,J.) th Dated the 19 January, 2012 Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi NKC /N.A.F.R. J.H.C. Sch.IV - 9) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI RANCHI The 19th January, 2012 (Criminal Jurisdiction) Against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 29.07.2003 & 30.07.2003 respectively, passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.5, Hazaribag in Sessions Trial No. 340 of 2001 arising out of Mandu (Kujju) P.S. Case No.378 of 2000 corresponding to G.R. Case No.2723 of 2000.
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. K. MERATHIA THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY
---
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1638 of 2003 Aghanu Manjhi ..... ...... ..... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... ... Opposite Party
-------
For the Appellant : Mr. Gopal Krishna Sinha &
Mr. Devesh Krishna, Advocates
For the State : Mr. Sardhu Mahto, A.P.P.
---
In the circumstances, the conviction and sentence to the appellant under Section 302 I.P.C. is set aside, however, his conviction and sentence under Section 201 I.P.C. is maintained. It was informed that the appellant has already served the sentence under Section 201 I.P.C. Accordingly, he is not required to deposit the fine imposed on that account by the trial Court and should be released from jail, if not wanted in any other case.
In the result, this appeal is partly allowed with modification in the conviction and sentence.
(R. K. Merathia, J.) (D.N. Upadhyay, J.)
----------------
Memo No. ............... Cr.
Copy forwarded to the..........................................................................for information and necessary action with reference to his order dated the ................... day of ............. 2012.......................... ............... and or communication to the .................................................. Magistrate ..................... Class of ......................
HIGH COURT "formal rule with follow"
By order of the High Court The .............. 2012... Asstt.Registrar