Budhu Oraon vs The State Of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
2025 Latest Caselaw 1697 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Budhu Oraon vs The State Of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) on 14 January, 2025

Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

                    Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 97 of 1998(R)
               Against the judgment and order of conviction and
          sentence dated 31.03.1996 passed by Shri Tarkeshwar
          Prasad, learned Sessions Judge, Gumla in Sessions Trial
          No. 171/96.

        1. Budhu Oraon.
        2. Rantha Bhokta
        Both R/o Vill- Tilaitand, P.S.- Palkot, Dist.-Gumla
                                                   ...    Appellants
                                     Versus
        The State of Bihar (now Jharkhand)          ...    Respondent
                                     ----

PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI

----

For the Appellants : Mr. Chandrajit Mukherjee, Amicus For the Respondent : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P.

----

Dated: 14/01/2025 Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. : 1. Heard Mr. Chandrajit Mukherjee, learned amicus curiae for the appellants and Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned P.P.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31-03-1996 passed by Sri Tarkeshwar Prasad, learned Sessions Judge, Gumla in S.T. No. 171/96, whereby and whereunder, the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 302/34 IPC and have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.

3. The prosecution case arises out of the fardbeyan of Lakri Oraon on 08-02-1995, in which it has been stated that on 07-02-1995, the father of the informant Charwa Oraon with two bundles of wood had left for Mangal Bazar, Gumla and the wife of the informant and his daughter were also going with the father of the informant with bundles of wood. The informant had gone with his ox to plough his farmland. It has been alleged that at around 9:00AM, the wife and daughter of the informant came running to the village crying and the daughter of the informant went to the field where the informant was working and disclosed that when the father of the informant was going with the wood Rantha Bhokta with a lathi and Budhan Oraon with a balua came out from the jungle and Rantha Bhokta assaulted Charwa Oraon with a lathi and as he fell down Budhan Oraon with the balua chopped off his head. The accused persons thereafter, had fled away. It has been stated that the wife and daughter of the informant had seen the assault committed by the accused persons. The reason for the occurrence is that the accused persons used to call the father of the informant a witch and about a year back, these two accused persons had called a killer to commit the murder of Charwa Oraon.

Based on the aforesaid allegations, Raidih P.S. Case No. 10/95 was instituted under Section 302 IPC against Rantha Bhokta and Budhan Oraon. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted and after cognizance was taken, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions where it was registered as S.T. No. 171/96. Charge was framed against the accused under Section 302/34 IPC which was read over and explained to them in Hindi to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

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

P.W.1 Budhani Orain has not supported the case of the prosecution and was declared hostile by the prosecution.

P.W.2 Budhu Bhagat has stated that he had gone to Kutuma village, a day prior to the occurrence and on the next day when he returned back, he came to know that Charwa Oraon has been murdered. It was not detected as to who had committed the murder. An inquest report was prepared which was signed by him and Chautha Oraon.

P.W.3 Somwari Orain has stated that on the date of occurrence at 8:00A.M., she was going to Gumla Bazar with wood and her father- in-law Charwa Oraon and daughter were also accompanying her. As soon as they reached Dholchuwa forest, Rantha came and assaulted her father-in-law with a lathi and when he fell down, Budhu Oraon assaulted on his neck with a balua and the blow severed the head from the trunk. On seeing the incident, she and her daughter went back and her daughter left for the field where her father was tilling

2|Page the field to inform him about the occurrence. She has stated that thereafter she, her husband and daughter went to the place of occurrence and stayed near the dead body. She has also stated that Somwari Orain, who is her Phua-Saas, was entangled with Rantha and Rantha wanted to solemnize marriage with her which was opposed by her father-in-law Charwa Oraon. She has stated that her daughter had died due to suffering a snake bite.

In cross-examination, she has deposed that when her father-in- law was assaulted, she and her daughter were returning home and on the way, they had met Budhu Lohar only to whom she had disclosed about the incident. There were some marks of lathi blow on the body of her father-in-law. The sister of his father-in-law used to call him a witch for which a Panchayat was also held. She had seen someone resembling Budhu fleeing away.

P.W.4 Lakri Oraon is the informant who has stated that on the date of occurrence at 9:00 AM he was ploughing his land and his daughter came and disclosed that Rantha and Budhu have committed the murder of her grandfather. At this information he, his wife, his daughter and his aunt Budhani Orain had gone to the place of occurrence. His wife had also disclosed what has been stated by his daughter.

In cross-examination, he has deposed that his daughter had disclosed that due to the bushes and being dark she could not identify anyone.

P.W.5 Chautha Oraon has been tendered by the prosecution. P.W.6 Dr. R. K. Gupta was posted as a Civil Assistant Surgeon in Sadar Hospital, Gumla and on 08-02-1995, he had conducted autopsy on the dead body of Charwa Oraon and had found the following:

(i) Rigor mortis was present on the both upper limbs but absent in both lower limbs.

(ii) Chopped wound cut head completely from trunk at level of 3rd cervical vertebrae to mid trachea anterior at both head and trunk levels corresponding to each

3|Page other size 5" depth 3½" side to side length with damaging to trachea over the blood vessels, nerves.

(iii) Sharp cutting wound 5½" x ½" x ½" deeper at extreme points and shallow in between left anterior part of chest.

The cause of death was an account of excessive shock and hemorrhage. He has proved the post-mortem report which has been marked as Exhibit 1.

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

6. During the pendency of this appeal, the appellant no. 1 Budhu Oraon had died and his appeal has abated in terms of the order dated 27-11-2024. This appeal, therefore, is confined to the sole appellant now, namely, Rantha Bhokta.

7. It has been submitted by Mr. Chandrajit Mukherjee, learned amicus curiae that the prosecution has miserably been able to prove its case against the appellant. The appellant is said to have inflicted Lathi blows upon the deceased, but the post-mortem report belies such assault. The appellant has been implicated as he wanted to solemnize marriage with the Phua-Saas of P.W.3 which was objected by the deceased. It has been submitted that the non-examination of the Investigating Officer has caused prejudice to the defence.

8. Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned P.P. has submitted that the evidence of P.W.3 gives a vivid description of the assault committed upon her father-in-law and the defence has failed to elicit any contradiction with respect to such assault. He has also submitted that the post- mortem report corroborates the manner of assault.

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

10. As per the prosecution case, P.W.3 and her daughter were the only eyewitnesses to the occurrence. So far as the daughter of the informant is concerned, she could not be examined as she had died during trial on account of suffering from snake bite. P.W.3, has in her evidence, assigned the role of the appellant as assaulting the deceased

4|Page Charwa Oraon with lathi and when Charwa Oraon fell down on the earth, Budhu Oraon had severed his head from the trunk with a blow by a balua. So far as Budhu Oraon is concerned, the post-mortem report corroborates the manner of assault attributed to him. However, the post-mortem report has not found any injuries or marks of lathi blow upon the deceased though, as per P.W.3, there were certain marks over the body indicating assault with a lathi. It also appears that while returning home, P.W.3 had disclosed about the incident to Budhu Lakra but he has not been examined by the prosecution. The Investigating Officer has also not been examined in this case. The false implication of the appellant cannot be ruled out as it was the deceased who was opposing the intention and desire of the appellant to solemnize marriage with the Phua-Saas of P.W.3. Moreover, the evidence of P.W.4 would further reveal that his daughter had disclosed that due to the bushes and being dark she could not identify anyone. All these factors thus indicate that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt.

11. The learned trial court has overtly relied upon the evidence of P.W.3 in convicting the appellant without dissecting the vulnerability in the prosecution case.

12. We, therefore, on the basis of the discussions made hereinabove, set aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31- 03-1996 passed by Sri Tarkeshwar Prasad, learned Sessions Judge, Gumla in S.T. No. 171/96.

13. This appeal is allowed.

14. Since the appellant is on bail, he is discharged from the liability of his bail bond.

(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.)

(ARUN KUMAR RAI, J.)

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated the 14th Day of January, 2025 Preet/N.A.F.R.

5|Page