BUDHIMAN ORAON Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2007-4-36
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on April 11,2007

Budhiman Oraon Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

R.R.PRASAD, J. - (1.) THE sole appellant, Budhiman Oraon was put on trial to face charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that the appellant committed murder of Bandhna Oraon. The trial court having found the appellant guilty convicted him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.
(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on the day of occurrence, i.e. 28.4.1997 Budhiman Oraon, father of the informant Tetla Oraon (P.W.3) had gone to village Deoragani and returned home in the evening at about 6 P.M. and while he was in his courtyard, the appellant Budhiman Oraon (informant's nephew) suddenly came and picked up quarrel with Budhiman Oraon. The informant and others intervened and got the appellant pacified. After some times at about 7 P.M. the appellant again came to the house of the deceased with an axe and started hurling abuses and also struck the door with an axe. Meanwhile, when he saw the deceased, he rushed towards him to kill him, upon which the deceased rushed towards backyard of his house where informant also came but the appellant cut his father with axe to death and the appellant also chased the informant to kill but the informant fled from there and came to other village and after some times when the informant came with other villagers, he found his father dead. Further case is that Lodga Murmu (P.W.5) Office -in -Charge of Bishunpur Police Station when received some rumour that one persons has been done to death at Ambatoli village Deoragani, he came to the village and recorded fardbeyan (Ext.2) of the informant and took the matter for investigation. In course of investigation, Investigating Officer (P.W.5) seized blood stained earth at the place of occurrence under seizure list (Ext.3) and also made inquest of the dead body and prepared Inquest Report (Ext.4). On the basis of said fardbeyan, a case was registered and a formal first information report was drawn. Further case is that Investigating Officer arrested the appellant, who confessed his guilt and on his pointing an axe, weapon used in the commission of murder smeared with blood was seized under Ext.3/1. Thereafter the dead body was sent for post mortem examination. Dr. Hemant Kumar (PW.4) held autopsy on the dead body and found the following injuries. 1. Incised wound size 3' x 2' x 1' over left occipital region of head with fracture of underlying bone, brain matter congested blood clot present. 2. Lacerated wound size 2' x 1' x 2' medial to injury No. 1 lower left occipital region of head with fracture of underlying bone brain matter congested blood clot present. 3. Bruise size 3' x 2' over left arm with fracture of humerous bone. 4. Bruise size 3' x 2' over dorsum of right hand. 5. Abrasion size 2' x 1' over back of right elbow. 6. Incised wound size 3' x 1' x 2' over left post auricular and temporal region of head with fracture of temporal bone. Brain matter congested and blood colt present. Pinna of left ear also cut. 7. Lacerated injury size 2' x 1' x 2' over left size of forehead fracture of underlying bone, brain matter congested blood clot present. 8. Lacerated injury size 2' x 1' x skin deep over right upper eyelid region. According to P.W.4 injury No. 1 and 6 were caused by sharp cutting weapon like Tangi. Other injuries were caused by hard blunt substance possibly by back portion of Tangi and so far bruise is concerned it may be possibility caused by pulling the person on ground. Doctor issued post mortem examination report (Ext.1) with an opinion that death occurred due to shock and haemorrhage on account of injury No. 1, 2, 6 and 7 which were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course in nature. After completion of investigation, police submitted charge sheet and, accordingly, cognizance of the offence was taken and in due course, when the case was committed to the court of sessions, charges were framed to which the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
(3.) THE prosecution in order to prove the charge examined as many as 5 witnesses. Of them P.W.1 Bishnu Bhagat is the witness to the seizure of an axe smeared with blood from the house of the appellant. P.W.2 Litni Orain, wife of the information as well as P.W.3 Tetla Oraon are the eye witnesses, who have testified that they saw the appellant committing murder of the deceased.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.