PATRIK KINDO Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a part heard matter. Today no body appears. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned Sessions Judge Gumla on 9.8.1999 in S.T. No. 193 of 1994 whereby and whereunder he convicted the appellant under Section 302 and 201 of the I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC and rigorous imprisonment for five years for the offence under Section 201 of the I.P.C.

(2.) THE case of prosecution in short as per the fard beyan of informant William Toppo is that on 20.3.1994 he along with Ranjit Xaxa, Pius Toppo, Wilfrad Minz, Lalit Ekka, Jagdius Ekka, Rajendra Xaxa had gone to the house of Ishwar Ekka in connection with a function of engagement (Lotapani). It is further alleged that on that day itself at about 7 P.M. the informant along with deceased and others had gone for strolling in the village. During that period itself the appellant Patrik Kindo met them and demanded Raw Tobacco from them to which they stated that they do not have, upon which some altercation took place in between the appellant Patrik Kindo and deceased Ranjit Xaxa. It is also alleged that in course of the said altercation deceased Ranjit Xaxa had assaulted the appellant. However, later on, the informant and his friends fled away and took shelter in the house of Ishwar Ekka. It is further alleged that in the night they have gone to see dance and later on they went for sleeping. It is further stated that in the night when the informant and his friends were seeing dance the appellant was sitting behind the house of Ishwar Ekka and he was seen by the mother of Ishwar Ekka, namely, Jusphina Minz. At that time appellant has covered himself with a blanket. It is further stated that when Jusphina Minz caught hold him and asked him to follow her he fled away. It is further stated that in the morning some children found that dead body of a person was floating in the village pond, whereupon the villagers and informant and his other friends went there and they found that the said dead body was of deceased Ranjit Xaxa. It is further alleged that near the pond they found some trailing mark which shows that the occurrence might have taken place at some other place and later on the dead body was brought and fell in the pond. It is further stated that after seeing the trailing mark they tried to search the place of occurrence and in course of that they found blood mark on the ridge of the field of Paskal. On the basis of aforesaid fard beyan, the police instituted the present case and took up the investigation. After investigation, the police submitted charge sheet against the appellant on the basis of same learned CJM, Gumla took cognizance of the offence. Later on the case was committed to the court of Sessions as the offence under Section 302 of the IPC is exclusively triable by the court of sessions. After the commitment the charges were framed against the appellant under Section 302 and 201 of the IPC and the same was explained to him to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Thereafter the prosecution had examined altogether 14 witnesses in support of its case. The prosecution had also exhibited and proved Post Mortem Report, Fard Beyan, Seizure List, Inquest Report and FIR in support of its case. After hearing the parties, the learned Sessions Judge by the impugned order convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid against which the present appeal has been filed.

(3.) ON the other hand, the learned Additional P.P. submits that there is confession of appellant before the police which leads to recovery of instrument used in commission of crime. It is also submitted that the prosecution had proved the motive for the said crime and other circumstances relied upon by the prosecution also shows that the crime was committed by the appellant and none else. Accordingly he submits that the impugned judgment does not require any interference by this Court in the present appeal.