- (1.) CR . Appeal No. 52/1999R is by Krishna Sahu andYogendra Das, who were arrayed as A1 and A5 in SessionsTrial No. 109/1997 on the file of 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Gumla. Cr. Appeal No. 60/ 1999R is by Ayodhya Sahu, Ram Kishun Das and Ram Chandra Das, who were arrayed as A2, A4 and A3 respectively in the aforesaid Sessions Trial. In this judgment, the appellants in Cr. Appeal No. 52/99R and the appellants in Cr. Appeal No. 60/99R will be referred as A1 to A5 in the same order as they were arrayed before the Trial Judge for the sake of convenience and the two appeals are also disposed of by the following common judgment.The appellants were charged under section 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C. On being found guilty under section 302 read with Section 149 I.P.C., each one of them was sentenced to imprisonment for life. The present appeals are against the said conviction and sentence.
(2.) THE deceased, Govind Sahu, is the brother of P.W. 9, Sita Ram Sahu, P.W. 4 Arun Kumar Sahu is the son of P.W. 9. P.W. 5 Mungeshwar Sahu is the father of the deceased. P.W. 6, Priyanka Kumari, is the daughter of the deceased. P.W. 8 Smt. Chinta Devi, is the wife of the deceased. They were residents of village -Varandha. Devanti Kumari, sister of A2 Ayodhya Sahu, was assaulted by the deceased, on account of which there were ill -feelings between the family of the deceased and the family of the appellants. It is said to be the motive for the occurrence, which took place at 5.30 a.m. on 25.5.1996. On 25.5.1996 at 5.30 a.m., the deceased Govind Sahu was proceeding to field to answer calls of nature. While he was on his way, A1 to A5 accosted him. A1 was having a bomb, A2 was having a Bhujali, A3 was having a Baluwa, A4 was having a bomb and A5 was having a lathi. They surrounded the deceased and A1 and A4 threw bombs at the deceased.The deceased sustained injuries. He fell down. Thereafter A2, A3 and A5 started assaulting the deceased -on various parts of the body. The deceased died instantaneously on receiving the injuries. The occurrence was witnessed by P.Ws. 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9. The complaint, Ext. 5, was given by P.W. 9 at Bharno Police Station at 7.00 a.m. on 25.5.1996, on the basis of which a crime was registered. After registration of the crime, investigation was taken up and the inquest was conducted over the dead body. After the inquest, the body of the deceased was sent to the hospital for autopsy. 3A. On receipt of the requisition, P.W. 7, Dr. Mrityunjay Sarogi, conducted autopsy and he found the following injuries: '' (i) Incised wound over left back of parietal region of the scalp 4" x 1" x 2" deep with fracture of under line bone and fracture of brain matter. (ii) Lacerated wound criciate sharp 4" x 1" x 1" with fracture of under line bone in left occipital region. (iii) Lacerated wound cruide in sharp 4" x 1" x 1" one inch medial to injury no. 2 with fracture of under line bone. (iv) Incised wound over forehead 2" x 1"1/2". (v) Incised wound over forehead in between two eye brows 1/2" x 1/2" x 1/2". (vi) Injury no. 6 lacerated wound over left lower front of thigh 1" x 1/2" x 1" deep . with charging of the surrounding skin. (vii) Incised wound over left lower scapular region 3" x 1/% x 2% and left thorasic cavity containing 50 C.C, blood, (viii) Incised wound over left scapular region 3" above injury no. 7 3" x 1/2" x 1/2" deep with tailing on both side extending medially for 2" laterally far 6". (ix) Incised wound over left scapular region 3% above injury no. 8 3" x 1/2 x 1/2". (x) Incised wound over right scapular region 3" x 1/2" x 1/2" (xi) Incised wound over right scapular region 1/2 inch below injury no. 10 size 1" x 1/2" x 1/2". (xii) Incised wound over left lateral aspect of neck 4" x 1" x 1/2" deep. (xiii) Incised wound over left lateral aspect of neck 1" above injury no. 12 4" x 1"x1/2" deep. (xiv) Incised wound semilunar part in shape over left upper surface of shoulder 4"x2"x1" deep. (xv) Bruise over back of right forearm and upper lateral right chest wall with ringing of hair involving about 2% of body area." The Doctor issued Ext. 2, the post mortem certificate, with his opinion that injury nos. 6 and 15 could be on account of explosive substance and injury nos. 2 and 3 could have been caused by hard and blunt substance, sue - as Tangi and that other injuries could have been on account of sharp cutting weapon like Baluwa, Bhujali and knife.The Doctor was of the opinion that injury nos. 1 to 3 are sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.
(3.) AFTER the completion of investigation, final report was filed against all the accused, who denied their complicity in the crime, when they were questioned under section 313 Cr.P.C.;