- (1.) THE appellant was tried under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and on being found guilty, he was sentenced to imprisonment for life. The allegation against him is that on the night of 19/20.12.1990, the appellant by joining the other unidentifiable persons strangled the deceased Som Chand Singh Sardar, leading to his death.
(2.) THE prosecution case is as follows: A few days prior to the date of incident, the appellant and his friends assaulted Suchand Mahto, who is the father of PW -3, Jitu Mahto. Hence, Suchand Mahto and the deceased Som Chand Singh Sardar were asked to live in the house of PW -3 for safety. On 19.12.1990, the deceased took his bed. PW -3, Jitu Mahto, was in the house along with his younger brothers and sisters. During night, the deceased went out of the house to pass urine. PW -3 woke up and saw the appellant strangling the deceased while the other unidentifiable persons pressing the mouth of the deceased with cloth. Thereafter, PW -3 saw the appellant and others, who were pressing with him, hanging the dead body to a tree. On 20.12.1990, PW -3 went to the house of Goutam Singh Sardar (PW -2) at 7.00 a.m. He informed him as to what happened on the previous night. Thereafter, complaint was given by PW -2 at the police station. Investigation in the crime was taken up, during which inquest was conducted and the dead body was sent to the hospital for post mortem. On receipt of the dead body, post mortem was conducted by Dr. Tulsi Mahto, PW -5. He found the following injuries: External - (i) Incised wound V shaped with prongs directed towards left over the front of neck overlying the sound box. The prongs were measuring 2.5 c.m. and 3.5 c.m. 1/5 cm. skin deep. (ii) Ligature mark 1.5 to 2 c.m. in width overlying the front and sides of the neck 2 c.m. above injury No. 1 which runs obliquely upwards backwards towards right with a knot mark overlying the mastoid process of skull bone behind the right ear. The ligature mark is more deeper towards left. There was mark of dribbling of saliva overlying the left angle of mouth and adjoining cheek. The doctor issued Ext.2, the post mortem certificate, with his opinion that the death is on account of hanging.
(3.) AFTER the completion of investigation, final report was filed and the appellant denied the incriminating circumstances. He examined two witnesses as DWs 1 and 2. DW -1, Tarachand Majhi, was examined to prove that the deceased was murdered by PW -4. DW -2 was examined to say that the DW -1 told him that the deceased was murdered by PW -4.;