Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 208 of 1991 (R). Case: Doman Sao and Ors. Vs The State of Bihar. Jharkhand High Court

Case NumberCr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 208 of 1991 (R)
CounselFor Appellant: Abhay Shankar Dayal and Supriya Dayal, Advocates and For Respondents: Ravi Prakash, A.P.P.
JudgesHarish Chandra Mishra and Dr. S.N. Pathak, JJ.
IssueIndian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Sections 302, 307, 326, 34, 341, 342
Judgement DateMarch 02, 2017
CourtJharkhand High Court


Harish Chandra Mishra, J.

  1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned counsel for the State.

  2. The appellants are aggrieved by the Judgement of conviction dated 10.09.1991 and order of sentence dated 12.09.1991 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribag, in S.T. No. 62 of 1984, whereby the appellants have been found guilty for the offence under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and they have been convicted for the same. Upon hearing on the point of sentence the appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.

  3. According to the prosecution case, the F.I.R. was lodged on the basis of the fardbeyan of the deceased himself, while he was alive. The fardbeyan of the deceased Kanhai Sao was recorded at Simaria State Dispensary on 01.07.1982 at 10:30 hours, by the A.S.I. of the Simaria Police Station, wherein the informant deceased alleged that on 01.07.1982 at about 9:00 A.M. he was going along with his younger brother-in-law on a cycle and when he reached near the house of the accused Doman Sao, he met Doman Sao and asked for his Rs. 250/- which was due with Doman Sao, whereupon Doman Sao became angry and the accused persons, namely, Doman Sao, Bhuneshwar Sao, Gopal Mistry and Bandhan Thakur, forcibly carried him to the house of Doman Sao. The informant raised alarm but no one came to his rescue, and in the house, upon the order of Doman Sao, the other accused persons forcibly pressed him to the floor and Doman Sao assaulted him by sword causing cut injuries on his left leg and both hands. The informant became unconscious and when he gained consciousness, he saw that his mother, sister and brother-in-law had come there and they took him out of the house. They also informed him that after assaulting him the accused persons had locked him in the room which was opened by the mother. Thereafter, he was brought to Simaria hospital. In the fardbeyan the deceased informant had stated that the accused had assaulted him with the intention to cause his death. As the deceased informant was not in a position to put his signature on the fardbeyan, he put his thumb impression on the fardbeyan. On the basis of the fardbeyan, Simaria P.S. Case No. 31 of 1982 corresponding to G.R. No. 339 of 1982 was instituted against the appellants for the offence under sections 341, 342, 326, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and investigation was taken up.

  4. It may be stated that at Simaria State Dispensary, looking into the serious condition of the informant, he was referred to other hospital, and the deceased was brought to Hazaribag hospital, where he died on the same day. In the same night the deceased informant was married and in the morning the occurrence had taken place. Upon the death of the deceased, section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was also added, and after investigation the police submitted the charge-sheet against the accused appellants.

  5. Upon commitment of the case to the Court of Session, the charge was framed against the accused persons for the offence under sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and upon the accused persons' pleading not guilty and claiming to be tried, they were put to trial. In course of trial the prosecution has examined 10 witnesses and has also proved the necessary documents. The defence has also examined two witnesses in the case.

  6. P.W.-2, Lakhia Devi is the mother of the deceased informant, whom the deceased had first seen after gaining consciousness in the room, where he was assaulted. This witness has supported the prosecution case and has stated that on the day of occurrence at about 9:00 A.M., she was at her grocery shop when the brother-in-law of the deceased, namely, Nagendra came on the shop and informed that all the four accused persons had taken Kanhai Sao (the deceased) to the house of Doman Sao and they were assaulting him. Upon getting the information she ran towards the house of Doman Sao and she also took a tangi with her. She found that the house of Doman Sao was locked from outside whereupon she broke the lock with the help of tangi and entered the room. She found her son lying in the pool of blood and he informed her that Doman Sao, Bhuneshwar Sao, Gopal Rana and Bandhan Nauwa had brought him there from near the blackberry tree and assaulted him by sword. This witness has stated that her husband and her daughter also came there. Her son was brought to Simaria and subsequently he died. She has identified all the four accused persons in the Court and has also stated that she had seen them fleeing away. This witness was put to cross-examination by the defence, but nothing of much importance could be taken in her cross-examination and she has stood the test of cross-examination.

  7. P.W.-1, Thakur Mani Saw, is the father of the deceased, who along with other persons had taken the deceased to hospital. He has stated that on the day of occurrence at about 8:30 A.M. he was at the tea shop of one Saroj Singh and he was taking tea. Saroj Singh and Lakhan Singh were also present at the tea shop, which is situated at the distance of about 200 yards from his house and can also be seen from his house. His daughter...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT