SUDRA MUNDA Vs. STATE OF JHARKAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2012-3-98
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on March 19,2012

Sudra Munda Appellant
VERSUS
State of Jharkand Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) BY Court. -1.Heard the parties finally, Both these appeals have been field against the judgment of' conviction dated 06.01.2012 and order of sentence dated 07.01.2012 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner -1. Khunti in Sessions Trial No. 745 of 2005, convicting the appellants under Sections 302/34 & 201/34 IPC and sentencing them to undergo R.I. for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5.000/ -each and R.I. for five years and fine of Rs.2.000/ - each for the offence committed under Sections 201/34 IPC.
(2.) THE prosecution case in short is that Etwa Munda (PW 3) gave his fardbeyan on 29.04.2005 that on 27.04.2005 at about 7.00 a.m. he had gone to fetch wood from jungle. In the afternoon, he saw his neighbour -Sukram Munda and Sudra Munda (appellants) coming from village side and appellant -Sukram Munda was telling that he would kill Nadi Mundain (deceased), sister of the informant, when he will find her. The informant after taking dinner, went to bed. On the next morning, his sister -in -law was alone in the house and on Thursday his wife Bahamuni Devi told him that the dead body of her elder sister Nadi Mundain was lying in the well. The informant went there and found the dead body. Villagers came there. The informant told about this fact to his nephew -Gobardhan Munda (PW 9) and others. It is further alleged that there was a quarrel between the deceased and the appellants six months ago. Mr. Yogesh Modi, learned amicus curiae, appearing for the appellants, assailed the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence on various grounds. He submitted, that as per the prosecution, appellants confessed that there was quarrel between them and the deceased over sharing of 'Hadia' (country liquor) during which the appellant -Sukram Munda assaulted her with 'Pidha' (wooden stool) on her head, due to which she died. He further submitted that except this, there is nothing against the appellants.
(3.) ON , he other hand, Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the State, supported the impugned judgment.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.