- (1.) Heard the parties. This criminal appeal has been directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 22.2.2007, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. -VI, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 126 of 2000/60 of 2006 corresponding to Dhanbad Nirsa P.S. Case No. 166/1999 [G.R. No. 2659/1999] whereby the appellant has been held guilty for the offence punishable under Ss. 302, 392 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/ - under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code, in default of making payment of fine, he will suffer R.I. for three months more; R.I. for five years under Sec. 392 of the Indian Penal Code. However, in the facts and circumstances, the learned Additional Sessions Judge did not pass separate sentence under Sec. 411 of the Indian Penal Code. Initially charges were framed against the appellant and Ranjit Singh under Ss. 302/34 and 392/34 of the Indian Penal Code but the learned Additional Sessions Judge has been pleased to acquit Ranjit Singh from all the charges framed against him.
(2.) The prosecution case, as it appears from the fardbayan of Paresh Nath Ghati (P.W. 6) recorded on 23.8.1999 at 19:30 hrs. at the village road falling between Salgariya and Bathnadih in brief is that the deceased was returning home after attending his duty but he was intercepted by three miscreants who were trying to snatch away his motorcycle. Baijnath Ghati (deceased) made strong protest and he was not willing to release the motorcycle. In the meantime one of the accused opened fire from his pistol causing injury to Baijnath Ghati as a result he died. The miscreants fled away with the motorcycle and wristwatch of the deceased. On the basis of fardbayan of Paresh Nath Ghati, Dhanbad Nirsa P.S. Case No. 166/1999, dated 23.8.1999, under Ss. 392, 302 of the Indian Penal Code against unknown miscreants was registered. During investigation the appellant with his associate Ranjit Singh was apprehended, they confessed their guilt on the basis of which looted wristwatch of the deceased was recovered from house of the appellant. The Police after due investigation submitted charge -sheet against the appellant and accused Ranjit. Since the offence under Sec. 302 IPC is triable by Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and registered as Sessions Trial No. 126/2000. The charges under Ss. 302/34, 392 IPC were framed against the appellant and Ranjit Singh whereas separate charges under Sec. 411 IPC against the appellant was framed. Since they did not plead guilty, they were put on trial. The prosecution, in order to substantiate the charges, examined altogether 8 witnesses and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, at the conclusion of the trial held the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Ss. 392, 302 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him accordingly. Ranjit Singh was not found guilty for any of the offences for which he was charged and he stood acquitted.
(3.) The appellant has assailed the impugned judgment mainly on the ground that the finding of the learned Additional Sessions Judge is based on extra judicial confession of the appellant. Admittedly there is no eye witness to the occurrence and material witnesses are relatives of the deceased who had visited the place of occurrence after receiving the news of robbery and murder. Parimal Tiwari (P.W. 3), Ashok Kumar Ghati (P.W. 4), Tara Pado Sadhu (P.W. 5) have turned hostile and have not supported the prosecution case. Sushil Kumar Ghati (P.W. 2), Paresh Nath Ghati (P.W. 6), Sadhan Chand Ghati (P.W. 7) are the close relatives of the deceased. P.W. 6 who happens to be brother of the deceased is the informant.;