SANATAN DIGGI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sole appellant Sanatan Diggi has preferred this appeal against the conviction and sentence dated 14th February, 2000 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Chaibasa in Sessions Trial No. 269 of 1995 whereby and whereunder appellant was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302, IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years for the offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act and also to pay fine of Rs. 3000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further RI for a period of one year, directing both the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) The facts of the case is based on the fardbeyan (Ext. 1) of the informant Amar Singh Nayak Munda (PW 5) recorded on 19/6/1994 at 20.00 hour by SI R.P. Singh, 0/C. Jhinkpani (PW 9) at village Choya is that in the file ://D :\Prograrn Files\Crirnes\database\aa\aa\2003 (2) Crimes 276 .htm 8/5/2006 evening while he was in his home, then Pitam Kunkal and Samir Diggi took him near the house of Chaitanya Das as this appellant Sanatan Diggi had called him. Informant along with these two persons went near the house of Chaitanya Das where he found Sanatan Diggi and Baikunth Kunkal, Sanatan Diggi demanded his share of the collected amount of last years fair. Informant replied that the money was lying with Puja committee. He simply performs the Puja. He had no knowledge about the money collected to run the fair. Then appellant Sanatan Diggi caught hold of his hand and handed over his pistol to Samir Diggi ordering to shoot the informant. He also asked Baikunth Kunkal to call the other associates. Informant also called his son through Pawan Das who was standing there. Informant caught the pistol and tried to snatch it. In scuffle, chain of the pistol was broken. Samir Diggi assaulted the informant with fists. On the alarm raised by the informant, the nearby persons assembled. Sanatan Diggi took the pistol from the hand of Samir Diggi and started fleeing away towards the North. Samir Diggi and Pitam Kunkal also fled away on cycle. Thereafter, Baikunth Kunkal also fled away on cycle towards the direction of Samir Diggi and Pitam Kunkal. The villagers chased Sanatan Diggi. He opened five rounds fire from his pistol causing one injury to Shiva Gope Matari on his right shoulder. Shiva Gope fell down there having sustained bleeding injury on his right shoulder. He was taken in front of his house and from where he was being taken for treatment to Sadar Hospital, Chaibasa on Tempo but he succumbed to his injury at the border of Choya village. The dead body was brought back to his home on Tempo and was on the road in front of the house of Shiva Gope Matari. After investigation, the JO submilled charge-sheet against Sanatan Diggi, Samir Diggi, Baikunth Kunkal and Pitam Kunkal. The learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Chaibasa framed charges against all the four charge- sheeted accused under Sections 302/34, 387/34, IPC and under Section 27 of the Arms Act read with Section 34 of the IPC. The learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Chaibasa acquitted Samir Diggi, Baikunth Kunkal and Pitam Kunkal whereas, he convicted appellant Sanatan Diggi under Section 302, IPC and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

(3.) The prosecution has examined 9 witnesses in order to substantiate the charges leveled against the appellant. PW 1 Darimo Debi is the wife of the deceased who is a hearsay witness. She only saw the deadbody of her husband when it was brought and kept in front of her house. PW 2 Pawan Kumar and PW 3 Rajendra Prasad Kunkal have not supported the prosecution case and were declared hostile by the prosecution. PW 4 Han Gope and PW 6 Ganga Ram Gope are the witnesses in whose presence; inquest report was prepared by the JO on which they signed Exts. 2 and 2/1 respectively. PW 6 Ganga Ram Gope is a hearsay witness who had also signed on the inquest report Ext. 3 PW 5 Amar Singh Nayak Munda, informant of this case, and his son PW 8 Daitari Nayak are the eye-witnesses of the alleged occurrence. PW 7 Dr. B. Dayal conducted the postmortem examination and submitted postmortem report (Ext. 4). PW 9 Rana Pratap Singh, the JO investigated the case, recorded the statement of the witnesses, prepared the inquest report and submitted charge-sheet against the accused persons. No one has been examined on behalf of the Defence. The appellant has taken the plea that due to enmity, PW 5 and PW 8 who are father and son, have falsely implicated him in this murder case.