- (1.) THE accused appeals.
(2.) THE appellant, on being tried for an offence under Sec.302 read with Section 34 Indian Penal Code and under Sec.291 Indian Penal Code, was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life under Sec.302 read with Sec.34 IPC. He was also directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years under Section 201 IPC. The present appeal is against the aforesaid conviction and sentence. The case of the prosecution is as follows : At about 5.00 p.m. on 13.11.1985, the appellant went to the house of Nema Ganjhu accompanied by another. The deceased Nema Ganjhu, the appellant and other persons left together. Thereafter the deceased was not seen alive. On 16.11.1985, the body of the deceased was found floating by the villagers and information was given as Khelari police station by the village mukhiya. On receiving he said information, PW 10 Vivekanand Singh reached the village, found the dead body and thereafter recorded the statement, Ext. 2, given by PW 1, who is the brother of the deceased. He took up investigation of the crime and prepared inquest report and the same stands marked as Ext. 4. After the inquest, the body was sent to the hospital with a requisition to the Doctor to conduct autopsy. On receipt of the requisition, PW 9, Dr. Renu Bala, conducted autopsy on the dead body and found the following injuries: (i) Lacerated wound 4 -1/2 x Ix 1/2 cm on the left side of occipital side of head. (ii) Abrasion 3x2 cm; and (iii) Abrasion 2 -1/2 x 1 -1/2 cm on the front part of right side of chest. (iv) Abrasion 3x2 cm on the left lateral part of the neck. She issued Ext. 1, post -mortem certificate, with her opinion that the deceased would have died on account of antemortem injuries caused by blunt substance and that the death could have occurred about 36 to 72 hours prior to the autopsy.
(3.) THE investigation continued and witnesses were examined during such investigation. After completion of the investigation, final report was filed against the appellant as the other accused, who went along with the appellant, was not available at the time of filing the final report.;