- (1.) SOLE appellant Ghasiram Kaibarto stands convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for life, by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No. 123 of 1995.
(2.) BRIEF facts leading to this appeal are that the appellant was married with one Artibala Kibarto, daughter of deceased Nakur Kaibarto and sister of deceased Konda Kaibarto. The appellant, later on, married with another lady and deserted PW 5 Artibala Kaibarto, for which a case was instituted upon him. The matter was finally settled between them, after the appellant and his father registered one and half bighas of land in her favour. On the date of occurrence, 29.5.1994, the deceased persons had gone to plough the said land at about 7.00 a.m. The informant, Shiv Kaibarto (PW 4) and cousin brother of PW 5, learnt at about 8.00 a.m. that both of them were killed by the appellant with sword and arrows. The informant rushed to the place of occurrence to find both the deceased lying with injuries on their body and the appellant fleeing away with the sword. The reason behind this occurrence was that the appellant wanted to grab the land registered in favour of PW 5 forcibly and did not like the land to be ploughed by the deceased persons. The statement of the informant was recorded by Potka Police at the place of occurrence i.e. Plot No. 142 situated in Ambera Sati, Mouza -Kailkapur at about 12.45 hours on same day, on the basis of which, Potka Police Station Case No. 29 of 1994 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the appellant. The appellant also surrendered before the police along with sword afterwards. The police started investigation of the case, seized arrows and bow from the place of occurrence as well as bloodstained soil in presence of witnesses, PW 1, PW 2, PW 3 and PW 6. The police sent the dead bodies after preparing the inquest report for postmortem examination and finally submitted charge -sheet against the appellant. The case of the appellant was committed to the Court of Sessions wherein the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur framed charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against him, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The trial Court after examining the witnesses found and held the appellant guilty for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to serve rigorous imprisonment for life.
(3.) THIS appeal has been preferred at the instance of the appellant on the grounds that the appellant has been found and held guilty on uncorroborated evidence of PW 1. It is also asserted that in admitted facts of enmity and land disputes between the parties, the trial Court should have given the benefit of doubt to the appellant. It is also asserted that non -examination of the investigating officer, particularly, in view of the contradictions in the evidence of PW 4, benefit of doubt should be given to the appellant, who has already remained in custody for last twelve years.;