- (1.) BOTH the appellants were put on trial to face charge under section 302/34 as well as also under section 201 of the Indian Penal Code for committing murder of one Jonga Sinku and for causing disappearance of the evidence of the murder. The appellant no.1 Tepa Tamsoi was found guilty for the offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code whereas the appellant no.2 Manjura Hembram was acquitted of the charge under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, though he as well as appellant no.1 Tepa Tamsoi were found guilty for the offence under section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, the appellant no.1 Tepa Tamsoi was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years under section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. At the same time, appellant no.2 Manjura Hembram in addition to sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under section 201 of the Indian Penal Code was also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.2000/ - and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.
(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on 19.10.1994, Jonga Sinku had gone to market along with Sonamoni (P. W.6) wife of the informant Debra Sinku (P.W.5) for purchasing vegetables etc. After purchasing, while they were returning home in the evening Sonamoni felt giddiness in the way and fell down. Thereupon, she was brought to a nearest house belonging to the appellant no.1 Tepa Tomsoi where she was treated with indigenous medicine by the appellant no.1. When condition of Sonamoni became slightly better, she was brought to her house by the appellant no.1 as well as other persons at about 10 -11 P.M. in the night. When the informant Debra Sinku (P.W. 5) asked from the appellants about the whereabouts of Jonga Sinku, appellants told him that she has stayed back at the house of appellant no.1. When she did not return home till 10 O'clock on 20.10.1994, informant came to the house of appellant no.1 in search of his aunt (Jonga Sinku) where he was told by the appellant no.1 that she had immediately left for her home in the previous night when he came home. Thereafter she was searched for about a week but they did not get any trace of her. Meanwhile, appellant no.1 absconded. However, when he was seen in his house on 26.10.1994, informant (P.W.5) told Village Munda namely, Kisan Sinku (P.W.3) about the presence of appellant no.1 in his house. Thereupon, on 27.10.1994 Dalpati Onama Gope (not examined) was asked to call appellant no.1. In obedience of the order, Dalpati brought the appellant before Village Munda (P.W.3). On being asked by Village Munda (P.W.3), appellant no.1 disclosed before Mangal Singh Sinka (P.W.4), Matai Sinka (P.W.8) that when he came back home from the house of the informant, he saw Jonga Sinku sucking the blood of bullocks to whom he caught hold of and assaulted on her head with Danda, as a result of which, she fell unconscious and then he called his brother -in -law (Sala) Manjura Membram, appellant no.2 and then both of them, strangulated her to death. Thereafter they wrapped her body in her sari and dumped it at Champila Forest. Thereupon the informant and others came to that place along with appellant no.1 where they found skeletons and also some parts of the body with flesh. Thereafter, Village Munda (P.W.3) sent a written information to the Kumardungi Police Station through Dalpati (not examined). On getting the said written information, a sanha entry was made in the station diary. Thereafter Officer -in - Charge, Dular Chand Pandey (P.W.10) proceeded for village Khandkhori. On reaching over there, he recorded the Fardbeyan (Ext.2) of Debra Sinku (P.W.5). Upon which case was registered. The appellant no.1 on being taken into custody confessed his guilt. Thereafter, Investigating Officer (P.W.10) took the appellant no.1 to that place where dead body had been disposed of and on showing the place, Investigating Officer did recover Skeletons as well as torn sari which were seized under seizure list (Ext.7). Said human remains were sent for examination. On examining it, Dr. Akhilesh Kumar Choudhary (P.W.9) found the skeleton to be of human (female) and accordingly, issued report (Ext.5).
(3.) AFTER completion of investigation, police submitted charge sheet against the appellants whereupon 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 appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.;