M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 25.1.1993 pansed by 7th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in S.T. No. 185/90, whereby and whereunder the appellant was found guilty of the charges for the offence under Section 302/324. IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.
(2.) THE prosecution case in short is that on 30.10.1987 at 3 p.m. the informant alongwith his mother reached near the house of Mangra of his village after harvesting Mania, the appellant Genda Oraon arrived there armed with tangi and hurled the same on the mother of the informant saying that he would kill her on the day. The blow of tangi caused injury on the back side of the head of the informants mother. Sustaining injury informants mother fell down. The accused again gave another blow of tangi, which caused injury on her nose. The informants mother succumbed to her injury. Further case of the prosecution, which is evident from the FIR, is that prior to assaulting and killing the Informants mother, the accused had assaulted Chito Kumari, Jharia Kumari and Rania Kumari, all of the same village. The cause behind killing the informants mother was exchange of hot words in between the accused and the family members of the informant, some days prior to the occurrence. On the basis of FIR a criminal case was instituted and the post -mortem of dead body was conducted. All the three injured girls were also examined by the doctor. On the basis of charge -sheet submitted by the prosecution, cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. The accused has not pleaded guilty of charges levelled against him. The prosecution examined altogether 9 witnesses. PW 1 is the father of one of the injured girl, who is the eye -witness of the occurrence. PW 4 is the informant of the case. PW 5. Jharia is one of the victim of the occurrence. PW 6 Rania is also one of the victim of the occurrence. PW 7 is the inquest witness, who has proved the inquest report and seizure list of blood stained earth. PW 8 is the doctor, who had examined all the injured three girls and also conducted autopsy on the dead body of the Informants mother. PW 9, who is another witness, who has proved the FIR. Out of the aforementioned witnesses, PWs 1, 4 and 8 are most important witnesses. The informant (PW 4). who is the daughter of the deceased, has categorically stated that on the date of occurrence when she was returning to the house alongwith her mother after harvesting Marua, the accused, armed with tangi, arrived on the road and hurled tangi on her mother saying that he would kill her on the day. The accused gave a second blow of tangi, which caused serious injury on the back portion of the head and the nose, as a result of which her mother succumbed to her injury. She further deposed that prior to assaulting her mother accused had assaulted Chito, Jharia and Rania, the three girls of the village. She further deposed that there was exchange of hot words in between her mother and the accused prior to the occurrence. The said witness was fully cross -examined but nothing adverse was said by the said witness. PW 1, another eye -witness of the occurrence, has fully supported the prosecution case and the version of the informant. PW 1 is none else but the father of the victim Chito. He deposed that his daughter Chito and the daughter of Jita namely Jharia were preparing vegetable in the house. In the meantime the accused armed with tangi came and gave a tangi blow on the back portion of the head of Chito from the back side. He gave another blow of tangi to Chito, which caused injury on her three fingures of left hand. PW 5, Jharia is ajed about 12 years and PW 6, Rania Is aged about 9 years. They also fully supported the prosecution case that the accused assaulted them with tangi PW 8, Dr. Arthar Minz proved the injury report of the victim Rania and Kumari Chito. The said witness also proved the post mortem report. On perusal of the evidence of the witnesses, referred to hereinabove, I agree with the findings recorded by the trial Court that the prosecution proved the charges against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt.
(3.) IT appears that the accused, in his statement under Section 313, Cr PC. said that at the time of occurrence he was insane, so he does not know as to what was done by him. On the basis of this statement, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused, argued that non -examination of I.O. is very much fatal to the prosecution case. Learned counsel submitted that it has come in evidence that the accused was called as mad in the village and, therefore, the I.O. was the most important witness because he could have said as to whether the accused was insane at the time when he was arrested by him. It was further argued on behalf of the accused that at the time of the commission of offence he was insane.;