Jharkhand High Court
Asif Ansari @ Babloo Ansari Son Of ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 15 October, 2024
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 504 of 2017
[Arising out of judgment of conviction dated 16.02.2017 and order of sentence dated
21.02.2017 passed by learned Additional Judicial Commissioner XIII cum P.O.
Commercial Court, Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 79 of 2015]
Asif Ansari @ Babloo Ansari son of Mirtula Ansari, resident of At Hochar, P.O. and
P.S. Kanke, District Ranchi (Jharkhand) .... .... .... Appellant
--Versus--
The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Respondent
For the Appellant : Mr. Jay Shankar Tiwari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Special P.P.
-----
PRESENT: SRI ANANDA SEN, J.
SRI GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
-----
JUDGMENT
Dated 15th October, 2024
By Court Since we are already hearing the main Criminal Appeal, I.A. No.9012 of 2023
is dismissed as infructuous.
Heard the parties.
2. The sole appellant is before this Court in appeal against the judgment of
conviction and sentence passed under Section 302 of the IPC.
3. Informant of the case is Chowkidar on whose fardbeyan Kanke P.S. Case
No.153/14 was registered under Section 302 of the IPC against the appellant.
4. As per the FIR, the informant was on patrolling duty in his beat area at 18.00
hours. At around 19.30 hours, when he reached near the brick kiln of Dilip Kumar
Sahu, he saw that the appellant was assaulting an unknown person with brick. On
Hulla, villagers gathered there and with their help, appellant was apprehended. It was
disclosed by the appellant that the unknown deceased had assaulted him and therefore,
he committed his murder. In the meantime, police came and the appellant was handed
over to the police. The dead body of unidentified person with marks of injury was
recovered from the place of occurrence.
5. Police on investigation, submitted charge sheet and the accused was put on trial
for offence under Section 302 of the IPC.
6. Altogether 15 witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution and
relevant documents were adduced into evidence and marked as Exhibit 1 - 11. The
blood-stained T-shirt of the accused was sent for chemical examination and in the FSL
report (Exhibit 10/1), human blood was found on it.
7. Learned trial Court convicted the appellant as he was apprehended at the place
of occurrence and P.W. 3 who was a direct eye witness to the incidence, supported the
prosecution case which is further corroborated by P.W. 7.
8. Judgment of conviction and sentence has been assailed on the ground that there
are material contradictions in the testimony of the informant who has deposed in para
5 that he was not present at the place of occurrence at the time of incidence and in
para 6, has deposed that he did not know the deceased and the assailant. It is also
argued that P.W. 3 has stated in para 9 that he had not read the content of the fardbeyan
and had merely signed over it. Out of the 15 witnesses examined, P.W. 1, P.W. 2, P.W.
5, P.W. 6 and P.W. 12 have not supported the prosecution case and were declared
hostile.
9. Learned A.P.P. has defended the judgment of conviction and sentence. It is
argued that appellant was caught at the place of occurrence by P.W. 3 with assistance
of the villagers. P.W. 3 in the cross-examination at para 8 has specifically stated that
he had seen the incidence himself. With regard to his deposition in para 5, it is argued
that the testimony of the witness has to be looked into in its totality. P.W. 3 both in
examination-in-chief as well in his cross-examination has stated that he was an eye
witness to the incidence.
10. Homicidal death of the deceased duly proved by the Doctor (P.W. 8) is not in
doubt and has not been assailed in appeal. P.W. 8 is the Doctor who has proved the
post-mortem examination report (Exhibit 4). Autopsy Surgeon found the following
injuries on the dead body: -
Abrasion
i. 6 cm x 2 cm left arm lateral side lower part.
ii. 15 cm x 10 cm front of left chest lower part adjoining front of left abdomen
upper part
iii. 5 cm x 4 cm frontal medial left knee.
iv. 10 cm x 4 cm right arm lateral side upper part.
v. 9 cm x 4 cm back of right forearm upper part.
vi. 8 cm x 2 cm right iliac region.
vii. 13 cm x 10 cm front lateral right thigh.
Ligature mark: - 9 cm x 4 cm fronto lateral left neck upper part.
Lacerated wound: - There is burst fracture of skull, cranial and facial bone broken into
pieces, lacerating the soft tissue, durameter and brain is completely out of the cranial
cavity.
Doctor opined that injuries were ante-mortem in nature and death was caused
due to these injuries by hard and blunt substance.
11. The incidence took place near the brick kiln, has been established by ocular
evidence of P.W. 3, P.W. 7 (the owner of brick kiln) and corroborated by the
Investigating Officer (P.W. 9). Blood-stained soil was collected by the Investigating
Officer and seizure list was prepared which has been proved and marked as Exhibit
9/1.
12. Appellant was apprehended from the place of occurrence, has been testified by
P.W. 3, P.W. 5 and P.W. 7. After the arrest, T-shirt with blood-stained mark of the
accused was also seized (Exhibit 9) and was forwarded for chemical examination to
the Forensic Science Laboratory. Report of the FSL was received and marked as
Exbibit 10/1 from which it is evident that DNA profile generated from each of the
source of blood-stained hair in the brick and the blood-stained T-shirt of the appellant
were from one and the same human male source of origin.
13. Appreciation of evidence in any case is to be made against the backdrop of
overall facts and circumstance unique to it. In the present case, when oral evidence
regarding the place of occurrence, arrest of the appellant on spot immediately after
the incidence, there cannot be any doubt regarding the veracity of account as given by
the informant (P.W. 3), who has stated that he witnessed the incidence in which the
deceased was battered by brick by the appellant. His testimony is duly corroborated
by P.W. 7 who is the owner of the brick kiln and arrived at the place of occurrence.
The immediate arrest of the appellant from the place of occurrence, seizure of his
blood-stained T-shirt and matching of DNA profile of the blood-stained samples with
the hair of the deceased establishes the prosecution case beyond any shadow of doubt.
We do not find any infirmity in the judgment of conviction and sentence.
Criminal Appeal stands dismissed.
Pending Interlocutory Application, if any, is disposed of.
Let the Trial Court Records be transmitted to the Court concerned along with
a copy of this judgment.
(Ananda Sen, J.)
(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated, 15th October, 2024
AFR/Anit
