LAKSHMAN URAON, J. - (1.) THE appellants have preferred this appeal against the order of conviction dated 4.9.1998 and sentence dated 5.9.1998 passed by Sri Dhirendra Nath Chakravarty, Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No. 292 of 1993 whereby and whereunder all the appellants have been convicted for an offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life; for an offence under Section 452/449 IPC, 5 years and; under Section 342 R.I. for one year each on each count directing the sentences to run concurrently in all respects. However, no separate sentence for the offence punishable under section 201/149 IPC has been awarded.
(2.) THE prosecution case has arisen on the fardbeyan of informant Dhiren Singh Munda (PW. 6) recorded on 21.3.1993 at 18.00 hours at his home village Mauni Baba Sonari by A.S.I. R.C. Singh (PW. 9), I.O. of Sonari PS. Informant was sleeping in his house along with his wife in the night of 18/19th March, 1993. At about 1.00 a.m. night, Bijay Kumar Gope @ Butru Gope, Chunu Bhumij, Petu Bhumij (absconder), Sunil Rajak and Sunil Gope, all of the same village, went to his home. They broke open the door and entered into his house. They brought out his wife Latika Devi alleging that she plays witchcraft resulting ill health of the wife of appellant Bijay Kumar Gope @ Butru. Bijay Kumar Gope has recently married one year prior to the alleged occurrence with Asha Devi as love marriage. Bijay Gope @ Butru Gope assaulted with iron rod to Latika Devi on her head. The other appellants also assaulted her with Lathis and rod. Informant raised alarm, then his brother Nidhi Ram Singh Munda (PW. 7) whose house is adjacent to the house of the informant, Bal Bahadur Kshetriya (PW. 2) and Debu Lohar (PW. 4) came and intervened. When the appellants threatened them, then they did not intervene. Bijay Kumar Gope @ Butru Gope and his associates confined PW. 7 Nidhi Ram Singh inside the home and locked it from outside. The appellants took the informant and his wife towards Kharkai river. They assaulted his wife in his presence with rods and Lathis and murdered her. At Bulaki Ram Versus Jatru Mahali about 8.00 a.m. morning, her dead body was buried at the burning Ghat in his presence. On 21.3.1993 at about 18.00 hours, when police went there, then the appellants fled away. The police in his presence exhumed the dead body of Latika Devi. On the basis of the fardbeyan (Ext. 3), case was registered besides these appellants against Pitu Bhumij also, but he is absconding after framing of charge. Hence the case of these appellants was separately tried.
(3.) THE prosecution has examined altogether nine witnesses out of them PW. 1 Kartik Chandra Mahto is the witness in whose presence dead body of Latika Devi was exhumed and inquest report was prepared on which he signed (Ext. 1). PW. 2 Bal Bahadur Kshetriya is also a witness in whose presence dead body was exhumed. PW. 3 Dr. Yogendra Prasad conducted autopsy on the dead body of Latika Devi. Ext. 2 is the post mortem report in his pen and signature. PW. 4 Debu Lohar, PW. 5 Banmali are the hostile witnesses, although as per fardbeyan of the informant, PW. 2, PW. 4, PW. 5, the independent village witnesses, are the eyewitnesses of the alleged occurrence. PW. 6 is the informant himself. PW. 7 Nidhi Ram Singh is the own brother of the informant and PW. 8 Bishu Singh is the nephew of the informant. PW. 9 I.O. Ram Chandra Singh on hearing rumour, went to the P/O. He found that the door of the informant was not locked; rather he himself came out of the house. The learned Court below relied the evidence of PW. 6, PW. 7 and PW. 8 corroborated by the medical evidence of PW. 3 Dr. Yogendra Prasad and also objective findings of PW. 9 I. O., convicted the appellants and sentenced thereunder.;