- (1.) BY Court. The appellants, Bihari Rai, Tulsi Rai and Ghutru Rai, were arrayed as A 1, A3 and A2 respectively in Sessions Case No. 156 of 1980/21 of 1985. In this judgment the appellants will be referred as A 1 to A3 in the same order as they were arrayed before the Sessions Judge. They were charged for an offence under section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. on the allegation that at about 9.00 a.m. on 28.6.1978, they, in furtherance of common intention of one another, caused the death of Badri Rai by the first accused appellant inflicting injuries with an axe and that the other two accused beat him with lathis leading to his death. The Trial Judge, accepting the prosecution version brought out through oral and documentary evidence, convicted the accused appellants and sentenced each one of them to imprisonment for life. The present appeal is against the said conviction and sentence.
(2.) P . W. 1, Ramfali Rai, is the son of the deceased, Badri Rai. There was a long standing dispute pending between the appellants' family and the deceased's family. Proceedings were initiated under section 145 Cr.PC. and several suits were also filed. The disputes between the two families were pending from the year 1952 and according to the prosecution, it is said to be the motive for the unfortunate occurrence. On 28.6.1978, the deceased left for his field accompanied by his servant, Mantu Rai. P.W. 1, Ramfali Rai, stayed at home and at about 9.00 a.m., he heard shouts, "Maro Maro" and came out of the house and started running towards the north from where the shouts were emanating. Reaching some distance, he found his father, Badri Rai, being chased by the first accused, Bihari Rai and the other two accused, Tulsi Rai and Ghutru Rai, were also found at that place. The first accused, Bihari Rai, inflicted three blows -two on the head and one on the hand of the deceased, Badri Rai, and the deceased fell down and the accused 2 and 3 also gave lathi blows and thereafter all the three accused left the place. The occurrence was witnessed by PW. 1, Ramfali Rai, PW. 2, Horil Rai, PW. 5, Kuwa Rai, PW. 6, Gopi Rai and PW. 7, Jarman Rai. In the meantime, information was received at Jama Police Station by Sudhir Kumar Sinha, Sub -Inspector, that some occurrence had taken place in the village -Barudih. The said Sub -Inspector, after making an entry in the station diary, left for the scene of occurrence and reached there, where the fardbeyan, Ext. 5, given by P.W. 1 was recorded at 3.00 p.m. The said fardbeyan was registered as a complaint and the printed first information report of the said complaint is Ext. 6. Ext. 1 is the signature of P.W. 1, Ramfali Rai, in the said complaint, Ext. 5. Investigation was taken up and the inquest was conducted, which stands marked as Ext. 2/2, during which witnesses were examined. After the inquest, the body was sent to the hospital with a request to the Doctor to conduct autopsy. P.W. 9, Dr. Upendra Prasad Sinha, Civil Assistant Surgeon, Sadar Hospital, Dumka, conducted post mortem on the body of the deceased, Sadri Rai, and he found the following injuries: - (i) Incised wound 1" x 1/2" x 1" on outer side of left arm; (ii) Incised wound 8" x 1" x 4" cutting the posterior left side of the scalp bone including the brain substance with a large haemorrhage (In the post mortem report the expression 'haematoma" and not haemorrhage as has been deposed by the Doctor) inside the brain substance; (iii) Incised wound 6" x 1" x 3 1/2  cutting the posterior right side of scalp bone including the brain substance with a large haemorrhage (here also the expression in the post mortem report is haematoma) inside the brain substance. The Doctor issued the post mortem certificate, Ext. 4, with his opinion that injuries (ii) and (iii) found on the body are sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death and that death must have occurred within. 36 hours.
(3.) AFTER completion of the investigation, the final report was filed against the accused appellants.;