- (1.) APPELLANT No. 1, Somra Munda, is the father of appellant Nos. 2, 3 and 4 lived at Tangra toil Kamanta, P.S. Khunti. All of them have been found guilty for the offence under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for committing murder of Sukhram Munda (full brother of the appellant No. 1) and each of them have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, by judgment dated 16.12.1991 passed by 7th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, Khunti in Sessions Trial No. 187 of 1987.
(2.) THE prosecution case, in short, is that on 31.10.1986 at about 6 P.M. the informant's husband, namely, Sukhram Munda, along with his five year old son Sanika Munda, P.W. 6 (tendered) had gone to the house of Mochi Rai Munda, P.W. 1 (declared hostile) to drink liquor. Some time thereafter, the informant heard the scream of her husband, coming from outside. On that, she came out from her house and went towards the road and saw that all the appellants, who were armed with tangi, were assaulting and cutting her husband. On seeing the informant, they fled away. Thereafter the informant raised hulla, on which witnesses Sanika Munda P.W. 6 (tendered), Soma Munda (P.W. 2), Konta Munda (not examined) arrived there and saw the accused persons while they were feeling away from the place of occurrence. The deceased died on the spot due to injuries caused by the appellants. On the next day, First Information Report was lodged by the informant and on the basis of which, investigation was taken up and the charge sheet was submitted and the case was committed to the court of Session where the charges were framed against them, which the appellants denied. Thereafter, they were put on trial. In order to establish the charges, altogether 8 prosecution witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. The only eye -witness to the occurrence is the informant (P.W. 5) - Birsi Munda, wife of the deceased, whereas P.Ws. 1 and 2 have been declared hostile. P.Ws. 3 and 6 have been tendered. P.W. 4 is Man Singh Munda, before him the inquest was prepared. P.W. 7 is the Doctor, who held post mortem examination of the deceased and P.W. 8 is a formal witness, who has proved Ext. 1. The Investigating Officer has not been examined by the prosecution.
(3.) ACCORDING to the doctor (P.W. 7), who held the post mortem examination of the deceased, following injuries were found on the person of the deceased. (i) Sharp cut injury 3' X 1' X bone deep causing fracture of the left mandicular bone. (ii) Penetrating injury 11/2' X 1' X 3' causing puncture of right lobe of lung. (iii) Cut injury 3' X 1/2' X scalp deep causing fracture of right occipital bone. (iv) Cut injury 2' X 1' X 1/2' causing fracture 1st and 2nd survical vertebra. (v) Penetrating injury 1' X 1/2' X 2' damaging the blood vessel and nerves in front of neck. All the injuries were antimortem in nature caused by sharp and pointed weapon. He has further stated that cut injuries may be caused by tangi but penetrating injuries by chhura. According to the doctor, the cause of death was due to shock and haemorrhage due to injuries on the vital organs. ;