SUJAN MANDAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
LAWS(JHAR)-2009-7-12
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on July 22,2009

Sujan Mandal Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF JHARKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) BOTH the appeals arising out of the common judgment were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) THE appellants were put on trial for committing murder of one Ranjit Mandal in furtherance of their common intention. Learned trial court having found the appellants guilty for the offence under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. The case of the prosecution is that on 31.8.1999 Ranjit Mandal, husband of the informant Parul Mandal (P.W.9) had gone to purchase Battery at about 7.15 P.M. and as such, the informant by taking lantern was waiting at her verandah for him to come. After 15 minutes when Ranjit Mandal after purchasing Battery reached near the house of Barun Mandal, the appellant Sujan Mandal shot at him, upon which Ranjit Mandal ran after him by shouting that he has been shot at but he fell down after going to some distance. On seeing all this, when the informant rushed to that place, she found other appellants fleeing towards their house. On reaching there she found her husband injured who disclosed that it was Sujan Mandal, who had shot at him. Thereafter she with the help of others brought her husband to her house where her husband succumbed to the injuries.
(3.) ON receiving such information when M. Singh, Officer-in-Charge of.Hiranpur Police Station came to the house of the informant, he recorded the Fardbeyan of the informant on 1.9.1999 at about 2.30 hours wherein she stated that accused persons committed murder of her husband as the accused persons who were not allowed to cut a palm tree belonging to the deceased leading to altercation at several occasions had extended threat of dire consequence. On the basis of Fardbeyn, a formal first information report (Ext.5) was drawn whereby case was instituted against the appellants and the matter was taken up for investigation by the. Investigating Officer (not examined), who on holding inquest on the dead body prepared inquest report. The Investigating Officer also seized Battery and blood stained earth from the place of occurrence under the seizure list in presence of Gour Mandal (P.W.10). When the dead body was sent for post mortem examination, it was done by Dr. Sushil Kumar Mehrotra (P.W.7), who on holding autopsy did find one ante mortem wound of entry of size 2.5 cm. x 1.5 cm with tattooing and charring 16.cm. x 16 cm. diameter surrounding the wound corresponding to shirt and ganji. Some liquid blood was found coming through the wound. One wound of exist of size 2.0 cm. x 1 cm was found near intercostals space 2.cm right to the midline with corresponding whole in ganji. On internal examination fracture of 4th right rib and rupture of lower lobe of right lung with liquid blood in the right side of thoracic cavity were found.;


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