HARI SHANKAR PRASAD, J. - (1.) THE appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 8.6.2000 passed in Sessions Trial No. 229/128 of 1998 -98. whereby and whereunder the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur held the appellants guilty under Section 326, IPC and convicted and sentenced them to undergo RI for three years.
(2.) PROSECUTION case in brief is that Helibala Karmakar gave a fardbeyan before Sri D. Ram, ASI of Patamda P.S. on 12.1.1998 at about 12.45 hours at Patamda Rajkiya hospital alleging that on Sunday i.e. on 11.1.1998 appellant Tusu came to her house in the evening and called her to her house. She went to the house of Chhotu Lal with Tusu and at that time wife of Chhotu Lal namely Padma Sahis and wife of Chhotu 'selder brother namely Sakuntala were present in the house. After some time Padma Sahis, Sakumala Sahis and Tusu Sahis lighted a Dibri and put fire with the help of flames of the Dhibri in the body of the deceased Helibala. The body of Heli Bala started burning, as a result of which she raised cries. She went in the Angan of the house of the appellants but none of them came to her rescue. Further case of the prosecution is that all the appellants pushed Helibala out of the house and closed the door from inside. When she was crying for help out side the house of the appellants, nearby people including Uday Karmakar, Gyanu Karmakar reached there and extinguished the fire. Local doctor was called, who treated her. She was not taken to any hospital because night had fallen and she remained in her house. She was brought to P.S. on a jeep next day, from where she was sent to hospital. The reason behind the occurrence is attributed to a land dispute. On the basis of statement of Helibala, Patamda P.S. Case No. 2/98 dated 12.1.1998 under Section 307/34, IPC was registered and IO after investigation submitted chargesheet. Cognizance in the case was taken and learned First Additional Sessions Judge recorded the evidence of witnesses both oral and documentary and came to a finding and held the appellants guilty under Section 326. IPC and convicted and sentenced them as aforesaid. It will not be out of place to mention here that in course of treatment Helibala succumbed to injuries on 23.1.1998 and the case was converted into under Section 302, IPC and charges were framed under Section 302, IPC. Prosecution has examined seven witnesses. PW 1 is Hare Krishna Karmakar. He has been declared hostile but he has deposed that he was in the house and Helibala was burning in the house of Chhotu Lal Sahis. He further deposes that parents of Helibala put off the fire but she did not disclose to him at that time who set fire on her body.
(3.) PW 2 is Gangadhar Karmakar. He has also been declared hostile as he has not supported the case of prosecution, so far allegation of burning is concerned, but he has deposed that he was told by Helibala that she was set on fire but he is unable to say whether she had disclosed the names of persons or not.;