JAGDISH KAHAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the appeals arise out of the common judgment and being heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The appellant Jagdish Kahar has been convicted under section 307 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and he has been further convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under section 324 of I.P.C. Appellant Madan Kahar has been convicted under section 307/109 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and he has been further convicted under section 324 of the I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo R.i. for one year. However, both the sentences are directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution case in short is that at about 8 P.M. on the night of 23.10.1978 when the family members of Lakhan Tanti including himself, his wife Radhiya Devi (informant) his sons and daughter were taking their meal and were about to go to their beds, appellant Jagdish Kahar came and called Lakhan 'sson Deonandan Tanti alias Devi Lal from out side. It is alleged that as soon as Devi Lal opened the door at the call of the appellant the other appellant who was armed with his dagger put his towel around his neck and dragged him to a nearby banyan tree. The appellant Madan Kahar was also present near the tree and Deonandan Tanti @ Devi Lal was thrown down on the ground near the tree and appellant Jagdish started stabbing him. However, Deonandan Tanti raised alarm and his father Lakhan Tanti and brother Sarjug Tanti (P.Ws.1 and 2) came there and tried to save him from the attack made by the two appellants. The victim 's father and brother were allegedly given few dagger blows by the appellant Jagdish Kahar. The mother of the victim Deonandan Tanti (P.W.9), his other brother Basudeo Tanti (P.W.4) and sister Sudama Devi (P.W.7) and Karuna Devi (P.W.8) also allegedly rushed to the place of occurrence and saw the assailant being inflicted wound by the appellants. Some other witnesses also came there and they also saw the occurrence. Thereafter it has been stated that P.W.5 Ram Sharan Mahto caught hold of the hand of appellant Jagdish Kahar as a result of which he could not inflict any further blow to any one. Having seen the witnesses both the appellants fled away. As Deonandan Tanti received serious dagger injuries on his chest and his brother Sarjug Tanti also received several dagger injuries and his father Lakhan Tanti, however, received simple injury at the hands of the accused appellants as such they were taken to Railway Hospital at Mokama Ghat and they were medically examined by Dr. S. D. Das (P.W.11). Thereafter the injured Deonandan Tanti and Sarjug Tanti were referred to Najarath Hospital Mokama for better treatment. There they were examined by P.W.10 Dr. B. K. Setty. After receiving the information regarding the injury the officer incharge of Hathidah P.S. Jagdish Pandey proceeded to the victims house and recorded the fardbeyan of the mother of the injured Deonandan Tanti and on the basis of the fardbeyan on 25.10.1978 a formal first information report was drawn and a case under sections 341, 324 and 307 I.P.C. was instituted against both the appellants. After completion of investigation charge sheet was submitted against the appellants. Accordingly cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the court of session where the trial concluded in the result as indicated above. The appellants pleaded not guilty and have stated that they have been falsely implicated in this case out of enmity.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that in this case all the witnesses are interested and no independant witness has been examined. It has been submitted that the person who had given the grievous injury on the persons of the injured is not known as there were two appellants and there is allegation that at a time they inflicted the knife blows. So far the submission of the learned counsel that all the witnesses are interested and no independent witness has been examined but only on this ground of interested witnesses the case of the prosecution cannot be discarded. These witnesses are natural and therefore they are trustworthy and reliable as they have seen the occurrence. So far the submission of the learned counsel that the person who assaulted the injured is not known, in this regard the evidence of the doctor P.Ws 10 and 11 is that Deonandan Tanti P.W.3 and Sarjug Tanti P.W.2 were having grievous injuries on their person. The grievous injury on the chest of Deonandan was on the vital part of body. The injury on P.W.2 Sarjug was also on his left lower chest. From the deposition of P.W.10 it is evident that injuries inflicted on Deonandan Tanti was caused by long sharp metallic object like dagger. It is also apparent from the deposition of Deonandan Tanti P.W.3 in paragraph 13 that he saw the dagger in the hand of appellant Jagdish. From the evidence of P.W.3 in paragraph 13 it is also clear that Jagdish had thrown the injured Deonandan on the ground and inflicted several Chura blows on his person. It has also been stated in paragraph 14 of P.W.3 that though Madan Kahar was having Chura but he did not inflict any injury to any one. It was also in the deposition of P.W.2 that appellant Jagdish was having Chura in his hand which was about 2 bittas in length and he inflicted injuries from that dagger. In view of the above it is evidently clear that the submission of the learned counsel is not supported by the fact. It is the appellant Jagdish who inflicted Chura blows which caused grievous injury on the injured person PWs. 2 and 3. The other witnesses have consistently stated that the appellant Jagdish came and he dragged his son putting a towel around his neck and took him near a tree and assaulted with dagger on his chest which is vital part of the body.