D.P.SINGH, J. - (1.) SOLE appellant Bigal @ Biglaha Mahto stands convicted for the offence punishable under Sec. 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for four years, by the 1st Additional Judicial Commissioner, Khunti, Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 664 of 1998.
(2.) BRIEF facts leading to this appeal are that in the afternoon of July 2, 1998, the appellant was carrying ripe jackfruits to Hatia when deceased Karma Oraon started negotiating for purchase of jack -fruits. As further stated during this negotiation, the deceased lifted a jackfruit to visualize it when it falls down on the road spoiling it. This led to an assault made by the appellant on the deceased with fist and pushing him down on the earth. According to informant, P.W. 2 Shushila Linda, her father fell down and became unconscious. Thereafter, the appellant moved away. The informant brought her father to the house after nourishing giving some water and massaging in the house, but the deceased remained unconscious. She went away in the morning to be informed by her brother P.W. 5 Sunil Linda that Karma Oraon breathed his last in the night. The matter was reported to Karra police who registered Karra Police Station Case No. 33 of 1998 under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant and started investigation of the case. The dead body was sent for post -mortem examination after preparing inquest report and finally submitted charge -sheet against the appellant. The case of the appellant was committed for trial to the Court of Sessions where charge was framed against him on 2.11.1998. The appellant pleaded not guilty. However, the learned trial Court after examining the witnesses found and held him guilty under Sec. 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to serve rigorous imprisonment for four years.
(3.) THE present appeal has been preferred mainly on the grounds that the conviction of the appellant was not sustainable particularly in view of the facts that cause of death has not been established. It is also asserted that the investigating officer of this case has not been examined and finally that even if the prosecution version is believed, the assault was not sufficient to cause death.;