Laxman Doraiburu @ Laxman Deraiburu vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 4284 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Laxman Doraiburu @ Laxman Deraiburu vs The State Of Jharkhand on 28 November, 2023

Author: Sanjaya Kumar Mishra

Bench: Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, Ananda Sen

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
         Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1047 of 2023

Laxman Doraiburu @ Laxman Deraiburu ...        ...    Appellant
                        Versus
The State of Jharkhand             ...     ...     ...    Respondent
                        ---------
CORAM:        SRI SANJAYA KUMAR MISHRA, C.J.
                   SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
                        ---------
For the Appellant:      Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent:     Mr. Vishwanath Roy, Spl. P.P.
                        ---------

04/Dated: 28.11.2023

      Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties, this Court

passed the following, (Per, Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, C.J.)

                      ORDER

I.A. No. 5717 of 2023

This is an application filed under Section 389 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of sentence and grant of bail

to the appellant, during pendency of the appeal.

The appellant has been convicted by the learned Sessions

Judge, Chaibasa in Sessions Trial Case No. 188 of 2021 vide CNR

No. JHCB01-001797-2021 as per the judgment dated 21.03.2023

under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and has been

sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine amount of

Rs. 10,000/- for the charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal

Code and further to undergo simple imprisonment of one year in

default of payment of fine.

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the case of

the prosecution is based only on the testimony of P.W. 4, who

happens to be widow of the deceased and that P.W. 5 has stated that

P.W.4 was not present at the time of the occurrence in their house.

This submission is vehemently opposed by the learned counsel

for the State.

We have considered the evidence of P.W. 4 and saw that she is

a natural witness to the occurrence as the occurrence took place in

the house of the accused as well as the deceased. They were

brothers. P.W. 5 happens to be the mother of both of them. She has

been declared hostile, so no much importance can be given to any

stray statement made in her cross-examination during trial, which is

not brought to the notice of the investigating agency during course of

investigation about absence of P.W. 4. Moreover, P.W. 4's evidence is

supported by the medical evidence in the shape of P.W. 7- Dr. Md.

Khalid Anjum, who found a stabbed injury over the inter scapular area

and further opined that the death of the deceased was due to

hemorrhagic shock and lung damage caused by a sharp and pointed

object.

In that view of the matter, learned counsel for the appellant has

failed to make out a case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail

to the appellant. Hence, this Interim Application is dismissed, being

devoid of any merit.

Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 1047 of 2023

List this appeal for final disposal in the third week of January,

2024.

(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, C.J.)

(Ananda Sen, J.) APK/VK