- (1.) BY Court. - The appellants were charged and tried for committing offences under Sections 364/149, 302/149 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused -appellant Kandra Tiu was further charged under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code for causing assault to the informant -P.W. 2. All the appellants have been found guilty and convicted under Sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. They have been also convicted for the offences under Sections 364/149 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo for rigorous imprisonment for five years and four years, respectively. Appellant -Kandra Tiu, additionally, has been convicted for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years. All the sentences are to run concurrently.
(2.) THE informant -P.W. 2 made statement before the police on 12th November, 1996 at 10.00 p.m. in tribal language, 'HO', which was translated by Madusudhan Aida, Manki, (P.W. 5) and on that basis, the fardbeyan (Ext. -7) was recorded by the police. Briefly stated the prosecution case is that on 11th/12th November, 1996 at about 12.00 a.m., the informant, her husband and children were sleeping in their house. The appellants -Kondro Tiu, Duga Tiu, Dona Tiu and Budhan Tiu entered into her house and caught hold of the informant's husband and began to assault him. The informant raised alarm and took up a DANDA and in order to save her husband, she gave one blow on Duga Tiu. Kondro Tiu caught hold of her and brought outside the house on a village street. Kondro took up stone and assaulted her on the face and tried to strangulate her. The informant then caused tooth bites on the hand of Kondro Tiu and anyhow managed to escape from that place. It has been alleged that the accused persons assaulted her husband. In conversation, they told her that they were going to kill him. The next morning when the informant returned home, her husband was missing. There was sign of bloodstain on the floor of the house, which was tried to be washed with cow -dung. However, there was still some bloodstain here and there. Genesis of the incident is said to be the property dispute, as the deceased happened to be the son of the first wife of Kondro Tiu -Appellant No. 1 and Duga Tiu happened to be the step -brother, supported by other accused -appellants.
(3.) ACCUSED -appellants denied the charges and pleaded not guilty. They claimed that they have been falsely implicated in the case due to animosity and land dispute. He was put on trial. In his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. he denied to have committed any offence.;