- (1.) THE sole appellant Ashok Ram was put on trial to face charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that he intentionally and knowingly caused death of Vijay Singh. The trial court, on findings the appellant guilty of the charge convicted under Sec.302 of the Indian Pena Code and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment.
(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that the informant 'sCo -villagers, namely, Ashok Ram (Appellant), Sudesh Yadav (P.W.1), Krishna Ram (P.W.2), Muneshwar Mahto (P.W.3), Ajay Bhuian (P.W.4) had grown sugarcane over the land of the informant which had matured for extracting sugarcane juice and, therefore, on 24.12.1996 all the persons named above and also informant 'sbrother Vijay Singh (the deceased) were busy in preparing 'Kolsar ' (the place where sugarcane juice is to be extracted). At about 4 P.M. some verbal altercation took place in between the appellant and Vijay Singh. In that course the appellant gave a blow on the head of Vijay Singh by spade, as a result of which Vijay Singh fell down and then again inflicted injury by the spade on the nock of the deceased and fled away. On account of injury sustained by Vijay Singh, there was profuse bleeding, as a result of which Vijay Singh died. Further case is that one Mukhtiyar Singh, ASI posed at Rajhara Outpost on hearing some rumour that a man has been killed in village Jhari, Police Station -Patan, came to the place of occurrence and found the dead body of Vijay Singh lying in the Kolsor and recorded the Fardbeyan (Ext.5) of Surendra Singh, brother of the deceased on 24.12.1996 at about 5.30 P.M., upon which a case was registered and a formal First Information Report (Ext.7) was drawn. The said Mukhtiyar Singh (P.W.9) took up the investigation and in course of investigation he held inquest on the dead body of the deceased and prepared an inquest report (Ext.2). Thereafter dead body was sent for post mortem examination and Dr. R.P. Sinha (P.W.10) held autopsy on the dead body of the deceased and found the following anti mortem injuries. i. Incised wound over in front neck about 4"x2"x1" ii. Incised wound over left mandible 2"x1"x1/2" iii. Incised wound over back of scalp about 4"x2"x.1" Dr. issued post mortem examination report (Ext.9) with an opinion that death was caused due to shock and haemorrhage on account of aforementioned injuries caused by sharp cutting weapon. Investigating Officer in course of investigation also seized blood stained earth at the place of occurrence and also seized the spade, the weapon said to have been used in the commission of murder and prepared seizure list (Ext.6). After completion of investigation, police submitted charge sheet and, accordingly, cognizance of the offence was taken and in due course when the case was committed to the court of sessions, charge was framed to which appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
(3.) THE prosecution examined altogether 10 witnesses. Of them P.W.1 Sudesh Yadav, P.W.2 Krishna Ram, P.W.4 Ajay Bhuian @ Ajay Ram and P.W.7 Surendra Singh, the informant, are the eye witneses whereas P.W.5 Sanjay Singh is the witness of inquest and P.W.6 Bikrama Singh and P.W.8 Haribansh Singh are the witnesses to the seizure of the weapon. P.W.3 Muneshwar Mahto has been declared hostile.;