LAKSHMAN URAON, J. - (1.) BOTH the appeals have been preferred by the appellants, named above, against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 21.61.1991, passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur, in Sessions Trial No. 457 of 1990, whereby and whereunder both the appellants have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. However, both of them have been acquitted of the charge framed against them under Section 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) THE prosecution case, as per the written information of the informant Raj Kumar Prasad, S.I. (PW 3), is that he received a written report on 13.5.1990 at 8.15 a.m. from Dinbandhu Singh Sardar (appellant of Criminal Appeal No. 197 of 1991), mentioning therein, that on 12.5.1990 in between 11.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon his younger brother Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar committed suicide by hanging. On his written statement, U.D. Case No. 2 of 1990 dated 30.5.1990 was registered and the informant was entrusted of investigate into the matter. In course of investigation, the informant (PW 3) sent the dead body for post -mortem examination and on receipt of post -mortem Examination Report it revealed that there was (a) ligature mark 1 cm. in width over front of neck, extending both sides of neck obliquely upward. The ligature mark was deficient over left mastoid region, but the right mark extending to back of neck and back of left neck. The tongue was pressed between teeth and (b) internal -There was fracture of thyroid cartilage. The m.m. of trachea, laryix and thyroid cartilage were congested with confusion so soft tissue around the trachea. The doctor opined that (1) The ligature mark was post -mortem but the internal injury No. (b) was ante -mortem, (2) Death was due to throttling and (3) Time since death was within 36 -72 hours from the time of post -mortem examination. On further enquiry the villagers Kaushalya Singh, her daughter Sombari, Man Singh and Ors. informed that there was frequent quarrel in between Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar and his brother Din Bandhu Singh Sardar. Both were living separately after the death of their mother, Anath Bandhu Singh entrusted his 6 Bighas of land for cultivation to another villager. Their mother was living with Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar. Her ornaments were kept with Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar. Appellant Din Bandhu Singh Sardar was demanding his share of gold. Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar did not give any share of gold to Din Bandhu Singh. There was a panchayati and in that panchayati also the matter could not be settled. Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar insisted that he will keep the ornaments left by their mother. In the year, 1990 Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar had sold one Arjun tree for Rs. 200/ - to villager Baijnath Singh. He had also sold one pair of bullock to Chunaram Mahto at Rs. 2000/ -. All the sale proceeds of tree and bullocks were retained by him. One year ago Din Bandhu Singh Sardar had cultivated the land of Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar, his younger brother, but he did not give any produce to Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar. Even he did not care for his fooding. Thereafter, Anath Baridhu Singh Sardar gave his share of land for cultivation to one Durlabh Singh and was living separately, having separate mess. Informant also came to know on the day of alleged occurrence at about noon on hearing the sound that life has gone, Kaushalya Singh, her daughter Sombari and Man Singh went to the house of Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar. They saw Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar lying on a cot and was uttering some sound. They saw Din Bandhu Singh Sardar (Appellant of Criminal Appeal No. 197 of 1991) tying his neck with a rope and his wife Tulabala Sardarin (appellant of Criminal Appeal No. 175 of 1991) had pressed the chest of Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar. After sometimes Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar became silent. The witnesses out of fear went away. After the alleged occurrence Din Bandhu Singh Sardar and his wife Tulabala Sardarin spread rumour, in the village that Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar had committed suicide by hanging. Din Bandhu Singh Sardar confessed before the villagers that he had committed a mistake and he prayed that he should be saved. Therefore, the villagers out of fear did not disclose the true facts before the police. Din Bandhu Singh Sardar went to the police station next day and misinformed the police, stating that his younger brother Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar had committed suicide by hanging which could not be corroborated by the result of the post -mortem Examination Report rather the death was due to throttling. On the basis of the information (Ext. 1) of PW 3 Raj Kumar Prasad (informant) Patmda Police Station Case No. 32 of 1990 dated 26.5.1990 for the offence under Section 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered. Both the appellants were charged under Section 302/34 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution produced altogether 13 witnesses whereas the defence had not examined any witness. The defence case appears that the appellants have falsely been implicated in this case. Appellant Din Bandhu Singh Sardar has further taken plea that he has not committed the murder of his brother rather when his brother committed suicide, he was not present in the village. He admits that he had informed the police.
(3.) THE genesis of the alleged occurrence as mentioned by the Informant in the FIR (Ext. 1) is that appellant Din Bandhu Singh Sardar and his brother deceased Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar were quarreling occasionally for partition of ornaments left by their mother and also regarding sale proceeds of Arjun tree and two bullocks sold by Anath Bandh Singh Sardar, who had retained all the money with him. Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar had given his share of land for cultivation to another villager Durlabh Singh, as his brother appellant Din Bandhu Singh Sardar, when cultivated the land for one year, did not give any share of paddy to Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar nor he cared for his fooding, who was living separately. The alleged occurrence took place on 12.5.1990 in between 11.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon at village -Beldih, Tola -Pokatora, which is 12 kms away from Patamda Police Station. At the time of alleged occurrence as it was noon, Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar was sleeping in his house. At that time allegation against both the appellants is that they entered into his house and appellant Tulabala Sardarin had pressed his chest while appellant Din Bandhu Singh Sardar tied the neck of Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar, while he was sleeping. On hearing some sound PW 4 Kaushalya Singh, PW 5 Sombari and PW 1 Man Singh went to the house of Anath Bandhu Singh Sardar and saw the alleged occurrence. The appellants in presence of these witnesses and the villagers confessed their guilt and begged pardon and prayed to save them. Next day Din Bandhu Singh Sardar, as asked by the villagers, went and informed the police resulting registration of U.D. Case No. 2 of 1990.;