- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 28thth April, 2006 and order of sentence dated 4thth May, 2006 passed by the then learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum- F.T.C.II, Bermo at Tenughat in S.T. No.300 of 2003/S.T.R. 07 of 2006, whereby and where under the court, having found the appellants guilty for committing murder of the deceased -Budhan Mahto, convicted them for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- with default clause .
(2.) The case of the prosecution is that on the day of occurrence i.e. on 05.03.2003 at about 9.00 a.m. while the informant was cleaning utensil at the well, she saw the appellant-Raj Kumar Kapardar, taking Budhan Mahto to his house where her son-Budhan Mahto asked the appellant-Raj Kumar Kapardar as to why he is fighting with his brother. Upon it, he lost his temper and asked his wife- appellant No.2-Gupta Devi to bring a Farsa, as Budhan Mahto is favouring his brother with whom the appellant-Raj Kumar Kapardar was not having good relation. The appellant No.2 Gupta Devi brought a Farsa and gave it to the appellant No.1-Raj Kumar Kapardar, who gave Farsa blow over the neck of Budhan Mahto, as a result of which, he died there instantaneously.
(3.) At about 12.10 hours when the Officer-in-Charge Kasmar Police Station Awadhesh Kumar came to the house of the informant, he recorded the fardbeyan (Ext. 7) of the informant-P.W. 9-Sulochana Devi, who narrated in the same manner, as has been stated above. On the basis of which, a formal FIR (Ext. 6) was drawn. When the I.O. took up the investigation of the case, he held inquest on the dead-body and prepared an inquest report (Ext.3). Thereupon, the dead body was sent for postmortem examination, which was conducted by Dr. Prabhu Narayan Jha -P.W. 8. On holding autopsy, he did find the following injuries on the person of the deceased:- Sharp cut injury 5' X 2' X Vertebra deep on the left side of the neck. The Doctor issued post mortem examination report (Ext.5) with an opinion that the death was caused due to shock and hemorrhage on account of the aforesaid injury.;