- (1.) THIS appellant was put on trial along with the accused Taslim, Daud and Kayamuddin on the accusation of committing murder of Ramesh Manjhi. At the fag end of the trial, the accused Taslim and Daud were found to be juvenile and hence their cases on being separated were taken for trial by Juvenile Justice Board. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, they have been acquitted by the Juvenile Justice Board. So far as accused Kayamuddin was concerned, he during trial died. In this way only the appellant stood trial. The trial Court having found the appellant guilty for the charge convicted him for the offence punishable under sections 302/34 of IPC vide its judgment dated 13.09.2012 and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/ -.
(2.) THE case of the prosecution as has been made out in the fardbeyan (Ext. 3) is that on 14.07.1998 at about 12 O'clock Ramesh Manjhi @ Fagu Manjhi (the deceased), son of the informant Baban Manjhi -P.W.6, was taken by the accused Taslim and Daud to forest for grazing cattle. In the evening the cattle came back but when Ramesh Manjhi did not come home, the informant -P.W.6 started searching. During that course Kishun @Kishore Manjhi -P.W.1, Shiblal Manjhi -P.W.3, and Butan Manjhi (not examined) disclosed to the informant -P.W.6 that his son Ramesh Manjhi had been seen in company of this appellant, Taslim, Daud and Kayamuddin on that day. P.W.6 -Baban Manjhi did not succeed in locating his son. However, one Durga Manjhi -P.W.8, son of Munshi Majhi -P.W.4 told his father that he had seen the dead body of Ramesh Manjhi in the forest. Upon knowing it, Munshi Manjhi -P.W.4 informed about the said fact to the informant -P.W.6 on 15.07.1998 at about 4.30 p.m. Thereupon, the informant along with villagers came to Sehda forest and found the dead body of his son. On the next date i.e. 16.07.1998 when Officer In -charge of Mahuatanr Police Station came to know about such incident, he came to the place of occurrence at about 7.45 a.m. and recorded the fardbeyan (Ext. 3) of Baban Manjhi -P.W.6 wherein he narrated about the incident as has been stated above. At the same time, he also made statement that those four persons including the appellant have killed his son as Kayamuddin, the grand father of another accused Daud was inimical to Chunnu Manjhi -P.W.2, the uncle of the informant.
(3.) ON the basis of said fardbeyan a case was registered and a formal FIR (Ext. 4) was drawn. The I.O. having taken over the investigation held inquest on the dead body of the deceased and prepared an inquest report. Thereupon, the dead body was sent for postmortem examination which was conducted by Dr. Kailash Prasad Sinha -P.W.7 on 16.07.1998 at about 1.45 p.m. Upon holding autopsy on the dead body, he did find following injuries: (i) incised wound on neck 6"x3" x4" cutting through back of neck just below hyoid cartilage (ii) piercing wound at right external border 1" below the right nipple 4"deep and 1" wide." The doctor issued postmortem examination report (Ext. 1) with an opinion that the death was caused due to shock and haemorrhage on account of injury No. 1.;