- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30th January, 2004, passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bermo at Tenughat in Sessions Trial Nos. 34 of 2000/47 of 2003, whereby and whereunder the Court having found the appellant Ritbaran Manjhi @ Libra Manjhi @ Libra guilty of committing murder of Dineshwar Manjhi, convicted him for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for life.
(2.) THE case of the prosecution, as has been made out in the fardbeyan is that on 24/08/1999 Dineshwar Manjhi (deceased) father of the informant, Shivnandan Manjhi (P.W. 9) was sleeping on the outer portion of the house whereas the informant was sleeping inside the house. In the early morning at about 4 'O' Clock when the deceased felt that some cattle has entered into his field situated near the house and were grazing maize crops, he woke up and drove them out. In that course, his father took the cattle towards the house of this appellant as the cattle belong to him. Meanwhile, the appellant gave a 'Tangi' blow on his father. When his father shouted, the informant -P.W. 9 as well as his mother Etwari Devi (PW -6), came out of the house and found Dineshwar Manjhi badly injured. There the deceased disclosed PW -9 as well as PW -6 that the appellant has assaulted him with 'Tangi' when he had taken the cattle to his house. They brought Dineshwar Manjhi (deceased) to their house where he succumbed to his injuries. Thereupon, the informant (PW -9) informed to the Officer -in -Charge of Petarwar Police Station, who, when came to the house of the informant, recorded the fardbeyan of the informant and took up the investigation. During investigation, the Investigating Officer (not examined by the prosecution) did hold inquest on the dead body of the deceased and prepared an inquest report. Thereupon, he sent the dead body for postmortem examination, which was conducted by Dr. R.P. Singh (not examined), who, on holding autopsy, did find the following ante mortem injury on the person of the deceased: - "One incised wound about 2" x 1/2" x 2" on the lower portion of the right side of his neck. The carotid artery (veins) were found incised. No other injury either external or internal was found." The Doctor issued Post Mortem examination report, which has been proved by PW -10 as Ext. 3. According to postmortem report, the death was caused on account of shock and hemorrhage as a result of the said injury caused by sharp cutting weapon. Meanwhile, the I.O. recorded the statements of the witnesses and also seized the 'Tangi', used in the crime. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was submitted upon which cognizance of the offence was taken against the appellant. When the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, the appellant was put on trial, during which the prosecution examined as many as 10 witnesses. Of them PW -1 Rikhilal Manjhi and PW -2 Mahadeo Manjhi, claimed themselves to be the eyewitnesses, did testify that when on hearing hulla they came out of their house, they saw the appellant assaulting the deceased with Tangi. PW -3 Raj Mohan Hembram, PW -4 Khirodhar Soren as well as PW -5 Suresh Kumar Marandi, are the hearsay witnesses, who derived their knowledge about the deceased being assaulted by this appellant from the informant Shivnandan Manjhi (PW -9). PW -6 Etwari Devi the widow of the deceased also claimed herself to be the eyewitness, wherein she did testify that when she came out of her house at early morning alongwith her husband (deceased), they found the cattle belonging to this appellant, grazing their maize crop. Her husband drove them out of the field and called upon the appellant, who came and assaulted the deceased with Tangi. She raised alarm and then her son Shivnandan Manjhi (PW -9) came, who took his father inside the house where he succumbed to his injury. PW -7 Narsingh Manjhi as well as PW -8 Bishu Manjhi are the hearsay witnesses, but they claimed to have derived knowledge that the deceased was assaulted by this appellant by none other than the deceased himself.
(3.) PW -9 Shivnandan Manjhi -the informant, has testified that when in the early morning his father (deceased) and mother (PW -6) came outside the house for easing themselves, they found some cattle belonging to this appellant grazing maize crop. His father drove them out. While his father was returning back, the appellant came with 'Tangi' and assaulted his father with Tangi. Thereupon, his mother raised alarm. On hearing such alarm, he came out of the house and found his father in injured condition. On being asked, his father disclosed that it was the appellant, who had assaulted him. Thereupon, he brought his father to his house but after half an hour his father died. Thus, it appears that the informant never happens to be the eyewitness to the occurrence, rather he derived knowledge of the occurrence from his father.;