Joseph Munda vs The State Of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
2025 Latest Caselaw 2402 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Joseph Munda vs The State Of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) on 5 February, 2025

Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

                    Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 212 of 1996(R)
         (Against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence
         dated 22.06.1996 (sentence passed on 28.06.1996) passed by
         Smt. Shakuntala Sinha, learned Additional Judicial
         Commissioner, Khunti in S.T. No. 31/94.)

         Joseph Munda, S/o Johan Munda, R/o Vill- Sigda, P.S.-
         Rania, Dist. Ranchi.            ...           Appellant
                                Versus

         The State of Bihar (now Jharkhand)     ...       Respondent
                                     ----
                                  PRESENT
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
                  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI
                                     ----
         For the Appellant     : Mr. Pankaj Verma, Adv.
         For the Respondent : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P.
                                     ----
                          Dated : 05/02/2025

Per Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. :

1. Heard Mr. Pankaj Verma, learned counsel for the appellant and Mrs. Vandana Bharti, learned A.P.P. .

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 22-06-1996 (sentence passed on 26- 06-1996) passed by Smt. Shakuntala Sinha, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, Khunti, in S.T. No. 31/94 whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.

3. The prosecution case arises out of the written report of Gopal Pahan, in which it has been stated that on 05-07-1993, at 10:00PM, he was having food in his house, at which point of time, Philip Munda, Danial Munda, Muskalan Munda and Joseph Munda (appellant) came to his house and when the informant came out from his house, he was assaulted by the accused persons with danda and when the father of the informant came out to save him, he was also assaulted with tangi, knife and danda as a result of which, he died. When on hearing the commotion, one villager Mao Pahan had come, he was also subjected to assault.

Based on the aforesaid allegations, Rania P.S. Case No. 24 of 1993 was instituted under Section 302/34 IPC. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against Joseph Munda, keeping the investigation pending against the rest accused persons and after cognizance was taken, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, where it was registered as S.T. No. 31/94. Charge was framed against the accused under Section 302/34 IPC, which was read over and explained to him in Hindi to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. The prosecution has examined as many as nine witnesses in support of its case:

P.W.1 Gopal Munda alias Gopal Pahan is the informant, who has stated that it was a Monday at 10:00PM and he was in his house along with his parents when Philip, Danial, Muskalan and Joseph came to his house and called him, at which he went outside and immediately he was assaulted on his cheek with a lathi. His father Jhirga Pahan came out to save him but he was indiscriminately assaulted by the accused persons with lathi, knife and tangi and as a result of such assault, his father fell down on the ground and died. When on hearing a commotion, Mao Pahan had come, he was also assaulted after which the accused persons fled away. He had identified the accused and had witnessed the incident since it was a moonlit night. On the next day, he had gone to the Police Station and had given a written report about the incident.

In cross-examination, he has deposed that Mao Pahan had come to the place of occurrence on hearing the commotion. When the assault had taken place, his father was at a distance of 20-22 feet from the house.

P.W.2 Mao Munda has stated that it was 10:00PM and he was in his house when on hearing the cry of alarm from Gopal Pahan, he had gone to his house where he saw Philip, Joseph, Danial and Muskalan assaulting Jhirga. Danial with a tangi, Muskalan with a knife and the others with lathis were committing assault upon Jhirga. When he tried to prevent the assault upon Jhirga, he was given a lathi

2|Page blow on his head on the backside. When Chamo, Matius and Sukhu came, the accused persons had fled away.

In cross-examination, he has deposed that when he came out from his house, he saw Jhirga lying on the ground. When he had gone to the place of occurrence, Joseph was not assaulting Jhirga and he was merely standing there. There was no previous enmity between Jhirga and the accused persons.

P.W.3 Masi Prakash Munda has proved the inquest report which has been marked as Exhibit-1.

P.W.4 Chamo Dahanga has stated that he was in his house when he heard a cry of alarm at which he went to the house of Gopal where he saw the accused persons assaulting Gopal and Jhirga. Danial assaulted Jhirga on his head with a tangi, while Muskalan stabbed him on his stomach with a knife. Philip and Joseph were assaulting Jhirga with lathis. Jhirga died on account of the concerted assault committed by the accused persons.

In cross-examination, he has deposed that when he had reached the place of occurrence, Jhirga was found lying on the ground and everyone present were crying. He had not witnessed the assault but had seen the accused persons fleeing away. Gopal had disclosed about the specifications of the assault. He has deposed that the Police had not recorded his statement.

P.W.5 Dhodho Munda has stated that he was in his house when he heard some commotion from the house of Gopal Pahan and when he went to the source of such commotion, he had seen Philip and Joseph armed with lathis, while Danial and Muskalan had tangi and knife and all committed assault upon Jhirga as a result of which, he died. The persons who had seen the assault were Mao, Gopal, Chamo, Matias and Soma and he had also witnessed the incident of assault.

In cross-examination, he has deposed that on alarm when he reached the place of occurrence, he had seen the assault. The accused persons had fled away on seeing them. He had seen Philip and Joseph assaulting Jhirga with lathis.

P.W.6 Soma Munda has feigned ignorance about the incident.

3|Page P.W.7 Matius Munda did not support the case of the prosecution and was declared hostile by the prosecution.

P.W.8 Devendra Prasad was the Officer-in-Charge of Rania P.S., who has proved the written report which has been marked as Exhibit-2. The formal FIR has been proved and marked as Exhibit-3. The investigation was conducted by A.S.I. Waqil Rathod. He had later on taken over the investigation and had merely submitted the charge sheet.

P.W.9 Dr. Vijoy Kumar Prasad was posted as a Medical Officer in Sub-Divisional Hospital, Khunti and on 07-07-1993, he had conducted autopsy on the dead body of Jhirga Pahan and had found the following:

I. Sharp cut injury 3" x ¾" x ¼" on dorsal aspect of left-hand middle.

II. Abrasion on left side of neck about 2"

circumference.

III. Abrasion on back of clurt below left scapula about circumference.

IV. Bleeding signs as clots presentation in both ears.

V. Sharp cut injury 3" x ½" x ½" horizontal on occipital region cutting soft tissue, occipital bone and ¼" of brain matter.

VI. Cranial cavity full with blood. Injury numbers IV and V were fatal and sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. The post-mortem report has been proved and marked as Exhibit-4.

5. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which he has denied his complicity in the murder of Jhirga Pahan.

6. It has been submitted by Mr. Pankaj Verma, learned counsel appearing for the appellant that P.W.2, P.W.4 and P.W.5 are not the eyewitnesses and, in their cross-examination, they have deposed of seeing the accused persons fleeing away. Even P.W.1, who is the informant, claims to have seen the accused from a distance of 20-22 feet and considering the fact that the assault had taken place at 10:00PM, the identification of the assailants becomes doubtful. Mr.

4|Page Verma has also submitted that the Investigating Officer has not been examined and the place of occurrence has also not been established which has caused prejudice to the defence.

7. Mrs. Vandana Bharti, learned A.P.P has submitted that it was a moonlit night and considering the close proximity of P.W.1 to the place of occurrence, it is but natural that he had been able to identify all the assailants and the fleeing away of the accused persons from the place of occurrence as stated by P.W.2, P.W.4 and P.W.5 further enhances the truthfulness of the testimony of P.W.1.

8. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective sides and have also perused the trial court records.

9. The incident of assault committed by the accused persons upon Jhirga Pahan has been well chronicled in the evidence of P.W.1 as he has specified the role each of the assailants essayed including the appellant, who had committed assault upon Jhirga Pahan with a lathi. The incident, according to P.W.1, had taken place at a distance of 20- 22 feet from his house. This does not mean that P.W.1 had seen the assault from a distance of 20-22 feet which can further be fathomed from the fact that P.W.1 was subjected to assault also prior to the murderous attack upon his father. Moreover, it was a moonlit night and the identification of the assailants, therefore, cannot be doubted. In rural areas, the inhabitants generally have a keen sense of observation specifically in the dark and in this context, reference may be made to the case of Ramesh v. State reported in (2010) 15 SCC Page 49, wherein it has been observed as follows:

"15. As stated earlier, the appellant and these two witnesses (PWs 3 and 4) are neighbours and, therefore, knew the appellant well and their claim of identification cannot be rejected only on the ground that they have identified him in the evening, when there was less light. It has to be borne in mind that the capacity of the witnesses living in rural areas cannot be compared with that of urban people who are acclimatised to fluorescent light. Visible (sic visual) capacity of the witnesses coming from the village is conditioned and their evidence cannot be discarded on the ground that there was meagre light in the evening. There is nothing on record to show

5|Page that these two witnesses are in any way interested and inimical to the appellant. Their evidence clearly shows that the deceased was last seen with the appellant and the High Court did not err in relying on their evidence."

10. Apart from P.W.1, the other material witnesses being P.W.2, P.W.4 and P.W.5 had all seen the assailants fleeing away. Their evidence, therefore, corroborates whatever has been stated by P.W.1. Though the prosecution has failed to address any motive attributed to the assailants, but in view of the eyewitness account, motive pales into insignificance. The post-mortem report also supports the manner of occurrence. The appellant had actively taken part in the assault committed upon Jhirga Pahan bearing a common intention amongst all the assailants and, therefore, the appellant has rightly been convicted for the offence under Section 302/34 IPC and sentenced accordingly. There being no merit in this appeal, the same is hereby dismissed. Since the appellant is on bail, he is directed to surrender immediately and forthwith to serve out the rest part of his sentence.

11. Pending I.A.s, if any, stands closed.

(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.)

(ARUN KUMAR RAI, J.)

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated the 05th Day of February, 2025 Preet/N.A.F.R.

6|Page