Mukhlal Mahato vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 1197 Jhar

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
             Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 155 of 2023
Mukhlal Mahato                                 .... .... Appellant
                           Versus
The State of Jharkhand                                     ....    .... Respondent
                              --------

CORAM :        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND
                           --------

For the Appellant     :      Mr. Shailesh Kr. Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondent    :      Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, A.P.P.
                             --------

Order No.03/dated 17.03.2023

The appeal has been admitted for hearing and the lower court records were

called for as would appear from the order dated 16.02.2023.

We have perused the lower court records.

The application filed under Section 389 (i) of the Code of Criminal

Procedure has been placed and has been heard with the consent of the learned Counsel

for the parties.

Mr. Shailesh Kumar Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant by

referring to the impugned judgment more particularly the testimony of P.W.1 wherein it

has been deposed showing the culpability of the appellant that the appellant, namely,

Mukhlal Mahato along with his son Durga Mahto were assaulting her grandfather

by hand and foot, meanwhile Mukhlal Mahato pulled testicles of her grandfather

due to which condition of her grandfather became worse. She, thereafter, has

raised alarm and informed to her father and mother, then they have reached to

the palace of occurrence. Her grandfather was taken to Govt. Hospital, Gomoh

from where he was referred to Katras and from there he was referred to Bokaro

and from there he was referred to Ranchi where her grandfather died.

The submission has been made that the specific allegation has been

levelled against the appellant, namely, Mukhlal Mahato that due to assault by hand

and foot and pulling of testicles, the death of the grandfather took place. The said

testimony has not been corroborated by the Doctor as would appear from the

testimony of the P.W.10 who has deposed in his testimony showing no evidence

of any apparent external injury over the body of the deceased. The reason of death

has been given that there was perforation of small intestine with presence of fecal

matter and yellowish fluid in the abdominal cavity. The aforesaid fact has also

remained consistent in his cross-examination. The further submission has been

made that the Investigating Officer has deposed in his testimony that while

recording the statement of P.W.1 under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. no statement to

the effect of pulling of testicles has been made.

Learned Counsel for the applicant in the aforesaid backdrop has

submitted that the sentence inflicted upon the appellant may be kept in abeyance.

After considering the aforesaid submission, we are hereby calling

upon the State to file objection if any explaining as to why the sentence inflicted

upon the appellant be not suspended.

List this matter on 29.03.2023.

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

(Subhash Chand, J.) P.K.S.