ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY,J. - (1.) The sole appellant is aggrieved by the Judgment of conviction dated 05.04.2008 and order of Sentence dated 10.04.2008 passed by the Additional Judicial Commissioner, Fast Track Court-VIII, Ranchi in S.T. Case No.564 of 2006 corresponding to G.R. Case No.2699 A of 2005 arising out of Angara P.S. Case No. 58/2005 whereby and whereunder the sole appellant has been found guilty and convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- only and in default of payment of fine simple imprisonment of three months.
(2.) The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 25.08.2005 at about 7 'O' clock in the morning the informant Sukhram Lohra who is the son of the deceased Jagannath Lohra residing in village Dokad, was informed by one boy from village Kamta that the father of the informant namely Jagannath Lohra was assaulted by the sole appellant with lathi and the father of the informant had become unconscious.The deceased father of the informant, his mother and his younger brother namely Sukhlal Lohra- who is the sole appellant of this case used to live at village Kamta. On getting the information the informant immediately rushed to village Kamta and found his father dead. On enquiry the mother of the informant informed the informant that scuffle took place between the deceased and appellant in connection with bringing water and grazing goat and the sole appellant of this appeal assaulted his deceased father Jagannath Lohra with lathi on his head. The deceased Jagannath Lohra sustained injuries on his head and fell down unconscious and died. After the occurrence the sole accused-appellant fled away from the place of occurrence along with the lathi by which he assaulted his father.
(3.) On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant, Angara P.S. Case No. 58 of 2005 was registered on 25.08.2005 for the offence punishable under Section302 of the Indian Penal Code and the investigation of the case was taken up. Upon completion of investigation, the police submitted charge sheet against the sole accused person. Upon commitment of the case to the court of Sessions, charge was framed against the accused person namely Sukhlal Lohra for committing murder of his father Jagannath Lohra by giving repeated blows on the head of Jagannath Lohra with lathi. Upon the accused persons pleading not guilty and claiming to be tried, he was put on trial. In course of trial, prosecution altogether examined 11 witnesses including P.W.1-Dr. Chandresekhar Prasad who conducted postmortem of the dead body of the deceased and P.W.11 -Wasi Ahmed, who is the investigating officer of the case. Out of the 11 witnesses examined by the prosecution P.W - 2- Dhaneshwar Lohra, P.W -3 Saligram Lohra, P.W -4Chamo Bedia, P.W - 5 HariLal Bedia, P.W -6 Mani Devi, P.W -7 Shanti Devi and P.W -10 Ganesh Singh Munda are not the eye witnesses to the occurrence and all of them reached the place of occurrence after the occurrence on alarm. They all have stated that they heard that the sole accused namely Sukhlal Lohra assaulted the deceased Jagannath Lohra by lathi causing him head injury, to which the deceased Jagannath Lohra succumbed. P.W -2 Dhaneshwar Lohra is a witness of inquest of the dead body of the deceased and he proved his signature. P.W -10 Ganesh Singh Munda is also a witness of the inquest and he has also put his signature on the inquest report. During cross-examination all these witnesses have stated that they have not seen the occurrence and simply heard about the same. P.W -8 Sukh Ram Lohra is the informant of the case. He has corroborated the contents of the fardbeyan. He was informed by his mother P.W -9 Lalo Devi that the accused Sukhlal Lohra assaulted the deceased. He has also proved his signature along with signature of Dhaneshwar Lohra on the fardbeyan which have been marked as Ext. 2 & 1 respectively. P.W -9 Lalo Devi is the sole eyewitness of the case. She is the wife of the deceased and mother of the sole appellant. She has stated that on the date of occurrence, at about 6 'O' clock in the morning, she was in her house along with her husband and the accused. She saw the accused SukhLal Lohra assaulting the deceased Jagannath Lohra with lathi on his forehead and in this manner the accused killed the deceased. On her alarm, the accused ran away with the lathi, with which he was assaulting the deceased, into the forest. After the arrival of the villagers she intimated about the occurrence to them. In paragraph no.2 of her cross-examination she has stated that the accused person is her son and is not mentally sound and due to his unsoundness of mind he has killed the deceased. ;