Jharkhand High Court
Arjun Rawani (Since Dead) vs The State Of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) on 12 June, 2025
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 268 of 1995 (P)
[Against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated
23.08.1995 (sentence passed on 25.08.1995) passed by Shri Shyama
Prasad Singh, learned Sessions Judge, Deoghar in Sessions Case No. 69
of 1994]
---------
1. Arjun Rawani (since dead)
2. Baliram Rawani alias Bali Rawani, S/o Huro Rawani
3. Gogal Rawani, S/o Dhaju Rawani
4. Mathura Rawani (since dead)
5. Sukhdeo Rawani, S/o Lalji Rawani
6. Pabarit Rawani, S/o Dhokri Rawani
All the above appellants resident of Mouza Teliadih, P.S.-
Karon, District- Deoghar.
7. Bishwanath Rawani alias Bishan Rawani S/o Late Maharaj
Rawani
8. Rawan Rawani, S/o Bishwanath Rawani
Appellants Nos. 7 and 8 are residents of Village- Situlwa,
P.S.- Karon, District- Deoghar. .... .... 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. B.M. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Lakhan Chandra Roy, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, Advocate
---------
C.A.V. on 08/01/2025 Pronounced on 12/06/2025
Per Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.
Heard Mr. B.M. Tripathi, learned Senior Counsel
for the appellants and Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned P.P. for the State
assisted by Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, learned counsel
appearing for the informant.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and
order of conviction and sentence dated 23.08.1995 (sentence
passed on 25.08.1995) passed by Shri Shyama Prasad Singh,
learned Sessions Judge, Deoghar in Sessions Case No. 69 of 1994,
whereby and whereunder, the appellants Pabrit Rawani, Sukhdeo
Rawani and Rawan Rawani have been convicted for the charge u/s
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
302 of the IPC and have been sentenced to R.I. for life, appellants
Pabrit Rawani, Gogal Rawani, Rawan Rawani and Bishwanath
Rawani have been convicted for the charge u/s 307 of the IPC and
have been sentenced to R.I. for 10 years, the appellants Pabrit
Rawani, and Arjun Rawani and Bali Rawani have been convicted
for the charge u/s 323 of the IPC and have been sentenced to R.I.
for 01 year. The sentences passed against Pabrit Rawani and
Rawan Rawani were directed to run concurrently.
3. The prosecution case arises out of the fardbeyan of
Barka Rawani recorded on 22.07.1993, in which, it has been
stated that at 8:00 A.M. the informant along with Barhu Rawani
and his sons Ghanshyam Rawani and Bhim Rawani were
ploughing the field. At the same place Khiro Rawani, Amin Rawani,
Chito Rawani, Baleshwar Rawani, Sukar Rawani and others were
uprooting the paddy seedlings. It has been alleged that a mob
comprising of 22-23 persons variously armed had come and had
prevented the informant and others in ploughing the field. This led
to exchange of expletives and on the orders of Mathura Rawani and
Maljit Rawani the accused persons committed assault upon the
informant. The accused Pabrit Rawani and Sukhdeo Rawani
assaulted Khiro Rawani as a result of which he fell down and
thereafter Rawan Rawani climbed on his chest and pressed it and
Khiro Rawani died at the spot. It has also been alleged that Chito
Rawani was assaulted by Pabrit Rawani, Arjun Rawani and Bali
Rawani. The incident occurred on account of the land dispute
between both the sides.
Based on the aforesaid allegations Karon P.S. Case
No. 43 of 1993 was instituted u/s 147, 148, 149, 447, 324, 307
and 302 of the IPC. 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
Sessions Case No. 69 of 1994. Charge was framed against the
accused Pabrit Rawani, Sukhdeo Rawani and Rawan Rawani u/s
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
302 of the IPC, against Mathura Rawani u/s 302/114 of the IPC,
against Pabrit Rawani, Gogal Rawani, Rawan Rawani and
Bishwanath Rawani u/s 307 of the IPC, against Pabrit Rawani,
Arjun Rawani and Balli Rawani u/s 323 of the IPC and against all
the accused persons u/s 302/149 of the IPC which was read over
and explained to them in Hindi to which they pleaded not guilty
and claimed to be tried.
4. Since the appellant no. 1 (Arjun Rawani) and
appellant no. 4 (Mathura Rawani) are no more their appeals stand
abated and survives only against the rest of the appellants.
5. The prosecution has examined as many as nine
witnesses in support of its case.
6. P.W.1 (Amin Rawani) has stated that at 8:00 A.M.
he was in his field uprooting the paddy seedlings and along with
him were Kaleshwar, Khiro, Bhim, Chito and Sukar Rawani.
Ghanshyam and Barhu were ploughing. Barka Rawani was also
present. He has stated that Mathura Rawani had come with 23-24
persons and started abusing them and asked them not to plough
the field. There was exchange of hot words between them. Mathura
and Maljit had ordered the others to kill at which Pabrit, Rawan
and Sukhdeo assaulted Khiro and felled him on the ground. Rawan
Rawani climbed on the chest of Khiro and pressed it. Khiro died at
the spot itself. Barka Rawani was assaulted by Rawan,
Bishwanath, Pabrit, Kisun and Sukhdeo which resulted in Barka
Rawani becoming unconscious. Chito was assaulted by Arjun, Bali
and Gogal. The Police had come at 6:00 P.M. and had prepared an
inquest report in which he had put his signature. He has proved
his signature in the inquest report which has been marked as
Exhibit-1.
In cross-examination, he has deposed that he does
not have the details of the land for which the incident had taken
place. There has been no partition of the land between the
brothers. The assault had taken place in the field of Nanki. The
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
initial assault was committed upon Barka Rawani who became
unconscious. Thereafter the assault was committed upon Khiro
and Chito Rawani. Barka Rawani was assaulted on his head by
Pabrit Rawani with the back portion of farsa. Rawan had assaulted
him on his shoulder and hand with an iron rod. Kiso Rawani had
punctured his left thigh with a pointed rod. No one else had
assaulted Barka. He has stated that Pabrit had given one blow with
a farsa on the head of Khiro while Sukhdeo had assaulted him with
a lathi on back. Chito was assaulted by Pabrit with the wooden
handle of farsa on his left hand. Arjun had assaulted him on his
back with a lathi. Bali had assaulted with a lathi on leg. All the
three persons due to the assault had become unconscious. After
the accused persons had fled away his family and wives of all the
four brothers had arrived at the place of occurrence.
7. P.W.2 (Kaleshwar Rawani) has stated that he was
in his field and along with him were Barka Rawani, Chito, Khiro
and Sukar. Barho, Ghanshyam and Bhim Rawani were ploughing
the field. From the east 23-24 persons had come and surrounded
them and started abusing them. Mathura and Maljit had given an
order to the others to commit assault after which Pabrit, Sukhdeo,
Gogal, Bishwanath, Rawan started assaulting Khiro with lathi,
farsa and rod. Barka Rawani was assaulted by Pabrit, Gogal,
Bishwanath with lathi and rod. Kishor had also assaulted Barka
with a rod. Chito was assaulted by Pabrit, Gogal, Arjun and Bali.
Barka fell down unconscious. Rawan had climbed on the chest of
Khiro due to which Khiro died.
In cross-examination, he has deposed that from
one hour prior to the incident of assault he was uprooting the
paddy seedlings. The initial assault was committed upon Barka
and five persons had participated in the said assault. When Barka
fell down on the ground the accused persons had turned their
attention to the other two persons. Barka was assaulted on his
head by Pabrit with the blunt side of the farsa. Khiro was assaulted
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
by three persons. Pabrit had assaulted Khiro with a farsa on head
while Rawan had assaulted him with a rod on his ribs. Sukhdeo
had assaulted him with a lathi on his left hand. Rawan had
climbed on Khiro and pressed his chest. Chito was assaulted by
Arjun with a lathi on his left hand. Pabrit had assaulted him with
the handle of a farsa on the hand while Bali had assaulted him on
his hand and legs with lathi. When all the three injured fell down
on the ground the accused persons had fled away. At the time of
the assault some of the villagers had arrived. The assault
continued for half an hour. He had seen the assault from a
distance of 150 yards.
8. P.W.3 (Chito Rawani) has stated that he was
uprooting paddy seedlings in the field and his nephew was involved
in ploughing. Amin, Sukar, Kaleshwar and Khiro were also engaged
in uprooting seedlings. The informant and Ghanshyam were
ploughing the field. The accused persons had come to the field and
they were variously armed. A quarrel had ensued after which
Mathura and Maljit instigated the others to commit assault. Barka
Rawani was assaulted by Pabrit, Sukhdeo, Rawan and Kishun who
broke his hand and legs. Barka Rawani fell down unconscious.
Khiro was assaulted by Pabrit, Sukhdeo and Rawan. Pabrit
assaulted with the blunt side of a farsa, Rawan with a rod and
Arvind with a lathi. Rawan climbed on the chest of Khiro and
pressed it. Khiro died at the spot itself. He was assaulted by Pabrit,
Sukhdeo, Bali and Gogal on his left hand and head with dandas.
He fell down after receiving injuries.
In cross-examination, he has deposed that he does
know the dag number of the field in which the assault had taken
place. There was no litigation between him and the accused
persons with respect to the said land. There was no quarrel prior to
the incident of assault. As soon as the accused persons came, they
had started committing assault upon Barka. After suffering the
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
assault with a farsa Barka had fallen down unconscious. He had
also become unconscious. He was admitted in Karra Hospital.
9. P.W.4 (Kishori Rawani) has stated that she had
gone to the field carrying breakfast for her husband. Barka,
Kaleshwar, Barho, Ghanshyam, Bhim, Sukar, Chito were in the
field and they were engaged in uprooting seedlings. Barho and
Ghanshyam were ploughing the field. The accused persons had
come to the said place and they were variously armed. They started
abusing and directed her husband and others to leave the field.
Mathura and Maljit ordered the other accused persons to assault
them at which Pabrit, Gogal, Kishore, Rawan, Bahadur and Kishun
started committing assault with iron rod upon Barka. When Khiro
and Chito went to save Barka Pabrit assaulted Khiro with the blunt
portion of the farsa on head as a result of which he fell down.
Rawan had climbed on his chest and pressed it as a result of which
Khiro died at the spot itself. When Khiro died, she fell down and
did not see what happened later on.
In cross-examination, she has deposed that she
was at the place of occurrence thirty minutes prior to the incident.
When she had gone her husband was uprooting seedlings. She had
seen the accused from a distance of 5-6 hands. Before the assault
there was a quarrel between both the sides and abuses were also
hurled at each other. No injuries were suffered by Kishore, Rawan
and Bahadur Rawani. The incident took place due to the dispute
with respect to the possession of the land. There were several
villagers who had assembled.
10. P.W.5 (Barka Rawani) is the informant who has
stated that it was 8:00 A.M. and he was in the field along with
Ghanshyam Rawani, Bhim Rawani, Barhu Rawani, Khiro, Amin,
Chito, Kaleshwar and Sukar. Ghanshyam, Bhim and Barhu were
ploughing the field while the rest were uprooting paddy seedlings.
The wife of Khiro Rawani reached with breakfast. It has been
stated that from Teliyadih 22-23 persons came to the place where
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
he and the others were working and all those persons were
variously armed. He had identified all those persons who had
come. They asked him and others not to indulge in the activities
they were doing but it was refused and this led to a quarrel.
Mathura and Maljit had ordered the others to commit assault and
this prompted Pabrit to assault him on his head with the blunt
portion of the farsa which resulted in his falling down on the
ground. Rawan Rawani had assaulted him on his left hand with a
rod while Kishore had given a rod blow on his thigh. Sukhdeo
assaulted him near his ear with a lathi. Bishwanath and Gogal had
also assaulted him with lathis. He has stated that Khiro Rawani
was assaulted by Pabrit with the blunt portion of farsa on head
and Sukhdeo and Rawan had also assaulted Khiro with rod and
lathi. Rawan had climbed on his chest and pressed it which
resulted in Khiro Rawani dying on the spot. Chito was assaulted by
Pabrit, Gopal, Sukhdeo, Bali and Arjun and he also suffered
injuries. After committing the assault, the accused persons fled
away. He and Chito Rawani were taken to Karra Hospital. His
fardbeyan was recorded by the Police at 5:00 P.M. He was referred
to Deoghar for further treatment where he was treated for 7-8 days.
In Deoghar his statement was recorded by the Magistrate.
In cross-examination, he has deposed that the field
which was the cause of dispute is in Dag number 190. The purcha
is in the name of Nanki who is the wife of Kail. Mathura is not
related to Kail. He does not know as to whether there was a
litigation with respect to Dag number 190 or not. He had become
unconscious on the way to the Hospital. He had not stated before
the Magistrate about witnessing the assault on Khiro. When he fell
down on account of the assault committed by Pabrit the other
accused persons had started assaulting him. Khiro was assaulted
only once by Pabrit in head with the back portion of the farsa. The
land which is the cause of dispute is his ancestral land.
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
11. P.W.6 (Dr. Arun Kumar Chakravarty) was the In-
charge of Sub Divisional Hospital, Jamtara and on 23.07.1993 he
had conducted autopsy on the dead body of Khiro Rawani and had
found the following:
1. The deceased had following antemortem injury:-
(i) One oblique lacerated wound 2" x ½" x
scalp deep, over middle of skull.
(ii) Fracture of left arm at its upper part.
(iii) Bruise with abrasion 1" x ½" over the part
of left arm at its upper part.
(iv) Two lacerated wound 1/3" x ¼"
subcutaneous tissue deep and ¼" x 1/6"
subcutaneous tissue deep over back of left
elbow.
(v) Oblique bruise 3" x 1" over left side of chest
at its lower part.
2. On dissection of skull, an extension haematoma
5" x 3" over middle and right side of skull under
the scalp was found. One linear horizontal
fracture of right parietal bone 3" length was
found. Haematoma over right parietal zone of
brain was also found. Brain matter and
membrane were mixed with blood.
3. On dissection of chest 7th, 8th & 9th left rib were
found fractured free blood found in the left plural
cavity. Left lung ruptured at its lower lobe. Heart
found empty. On dissection of abdomen free
dark blood about one litre was found in the
peritoneal cavity. Spleen was found ruptured.
Stool discharge at the anus was also found.
The cause of death was opined to be due to shock
as a result of intra-cranial, intra-thoracic and intra-peritoneal
antemortem injury nos. 1 and 5 caused by hard and blunt
substance. He has proved the post-mortem report which has been
marked as Exhibit-2.
12. P.W.7 (Dr. Surendra Kumar Singh) was posted as a
Civil Assistant Surgeon, Karo and on 22.07.1993 he had examined
Barka Rawani and had found the following:
(i) Lacerated wound 8" x ¼" on the middle of the
scalp.
(ii) Lacerated wound 3" x ¼" on the left side of the
parietal part of the skull.
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
(iii) Penetrating injury 1" x ½" on the lateral side of
left upper arm.
(iv) Lacerated wound 2½" x 1" on the lateral side of
left forearm. Bone was looking out from the injury.
(v) Penetrating wound 1" x ½" x 1" deep on the
lateral side of the left thigh.
(vi) Swelling and tenderness on the left upper arm.
Swelling and tenderness on the whole left upper
arm.
(vii) Swelling and tenderness 5" x 3" on the left leg
around knee joint.
All the injuries except iii and v were caused by hard
and blunt substance and injury nos. iii and v were caused by
penetrating weapon like arrow or Barchhi. The injury report has
been proved and marked as Exhibit-3.
On the same day he had examined Chito Rawani
and had found the following:-
(i) Lacerated wound 2" x ¼" bone deep on the
middle of scalp.
(ii) Abrasion 8" x 7" on the left upper arm.
(iii) Penetrating wound 1½" x 1" deep in the injury
no. (ii).
(iv) Lacerated wound 2½" x ¼" on the lateral side of
right forearm.
(v) Lacerated wound 1" x 1" on the right scapular
region.
(vi) Lacerated wound ½" x ½" on the left leg near
knee joint.
(vii) Lacerated wound 1" x ½" on the left leg on the
calf region.
(viii) Pain and swelling over the right knee joint.
All the injuries except injury no. iii were caused by
hard and blunt substance and injury no. iii was caused by
penetrating weapon like Barchhi. The injury report has been
proved and marked as Exhibit-3/1.
13. P.W.8 (Maheshwar Prasad Yadav) was posted as an
Officer-in-Charge of Kairo P.S. and on 22.09.1993 he had recorded
the fardbeyan of Barka Rawani. The fardbeyan has been proved
and marked as Exhibit-4. He had issued a requisition for the
injured person. He has proved the formal FIR which has been
marked as Exhibit-5. He had himself taken over the investigation
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
of the case. He had inspected the place of occurrence which is a
farm land on the eastern side of village Teliyadih and southern side
of village Majhidih. He had not found any blood stains at the place
of occurrence. On the eastern side of the field the body of Khiro
Rawani was lying. He had recorded the statement of the witnesses
and had submitted charge-sheet. He has proved the inquest report
which has been marked as Exhibit-6.
In cross-examination, he has deposed that he had
not recorded the statements of the injured or their family members
at the hospital. He had prepared the inquest report at the place of
occurrence. He had searched the house of the accused. He had not
recorded the statement of Amin Rawani since neither he was an
eyewitness nor he had stated the name of the accused before him.
Kaleshwar Rawani had stated before him that he had come to
know about the incident from the womenfolk of the village. Chito
Rawani had not stated before him that Pabrit, Sukhdeo, Kisun and
Rawan had committed assault upon Barka and Pabrit, Sukhdeo
and Rawan had committed assault upon Khiro. The witness
Kishori Devi had not stated before him that Pabrit with farsa and
Rawan and Kishore with rod had assaulted her husband. She had
also not stated that Rawan had climbed on the chest of her
husband and pressed it and that Mathura and Maljit had given the
order of committing assault. The witness Barka Rawani had not
stated before him that Pabrit had assaulted him with the blunt
portion of the farsa. He had also not stated about the manner of
assault committed by Rawan, Kishun and Sukhdeo.
14. P.W.9 (Vijay Kumar Mandal) was posted as a
Judicial Magistrate and on 24.07.1993 on the orders of C.J.M.,
Deoghar he had recorded the statement of Barka Rawani. The
statement has been proved and marked as Exhibit-7.
In cross-examination, he has deposed that the
statement was recorded after he was satisfied that Barka Rawani
was in a fit mental condition to give his statement.
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
15. The statements of the accused were recorded u/s
313 Cr.P.C., in which, they have denied their complicity in the
commission of the assault.
16. The defence has examined two witnesses in support
of its case.
17. D.W.1 (Balkrishna Yadav) has proved the revenue
receipts issued by the Karamchari of Kairo Anchal which have been
marked as Exhibit-A to A/3. One receipt was in the handwriting of
Dulo Rana which has been marked as Exhibit-A/4.
18. D.W.2 (Parash Nath Ram) has proved three revenue
receipts issued by Gopikant Jha which have been marked as
Exhibit-A/5 to A/9.
19. It has been submitted by Mr. B.M. Tripathi, learned
Senior Counsel for the appellants that the land in question belongs
to the accused persons and it was the informant party who were
the aggressors as they wanted to take forcible possession of the
land. Mr. Tripathi, in support of such contention has taken us
through the various land related documents which have been
marked as Exhibits. The appellants have exercised their right of
private defence which consequently led to the death of Khiro
Rawani. It has been submitted that the prosecution has failed to
examine several of the key witnesses who are said to be present
when the incident of assault had taken place. Most of the
witnesses have given an exaggerated version, an instance of which
can be had from the informant (P.W.5) who has disclosed the
assault in details though as per some of the prosecution witnesses
P.W.5 was the first person who had been assaulted which resulted
in his becoming unconscious and, therefore, there was no occasion
for him to have seen Chito and Khiro Rawani being assaulted. In
fact, the prosecution case has been demolished as none of the
witnesses had described the assault and the perpetrators of
assault to the Investigating Officer (P.W.8).
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
20. Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned P.P. has taken us
through the evidence of P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.3, P.W.4 and P.W.5 and
has stated about the witnesses having seen the incident and P.W.3
and P.W.5 being the injured witnesses as well. The injury report as
also the post-mortem report corroborates the manner of assault
attributed to the appellants.
21. Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, learned counsel
appearing for the informant apart from adopting the submissions
advanced by the learned P.P. has added that the arrival of the
accused persons with various weapons signify the fact that they
were the aggressors. An element of predetermination is apparent in
the act of the appellants which resulted in the death of Khiro
Rawani.
22. We have heard the learned counsel for the
respective parties and have also perused the Trial Court Records.
23. An unprovoked assault had taken place crafted by
the accused persons while the informant party was busy in
uprooting paddy seedlings and ploughing their field. Such assault
led to the death of Khiro Rawani and sustenance of grievous injury
to Chito Rawani and Barka Rawani. The incident had occurred on
account of a land dispute and the defense has exhibited various
land related documents and orders of the Court to strengthen their
claim that the land belonged to the appellants which was forcibly
being tilled by the informant party and which resulted in such
assault. The informant party being the aggressors and the
appellants having exercised their right of private defense are the
key components in the submission of the learned Senior Counsel
for the appellants. Some documents have been brought on record
by the defense but the same does not conclusively prove that the
land belongs to the appellants. None of the prosecution or defense
witnesses have stated about any aggression shown by the
informant party or that it was the accused persons who were tilling
the land. It is the consistent case of the prosecution that some of
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
the members of the informant party were uprooting seedlings while
the others were busy in ploughing the field. The ownership of the
land appears to be in a suspended state with none of the parties
being able to demonstrate substantially and convincingly about
their ownership. It is also not the case of the defense that the
informant party was variously armed. In fact, the appellants had
come in hordes with the other accused persons having dangerous
weapons in their possession and started committing indiscriminate
assault upon Khiro Rawani, Barka Rawani and Chito Rawani. The
exercise adopted by the appellants epitomizes the intent and
preplanned and preconceived conduct of the appellants in trying to
do away with the life of the informant party. So overwhelming were
the accused persons in numbers that no attempt was made by any
of the informant party members to show some resistance. This can
be gathered from the fact that not a single appellant had even
suffered a scratch. Even if we assume that it was a case of exercise
of private defense the appellants had apparently exceeded such
right and, therefore, the plea of the defense in such context is
negated by us.
24. It seems that several eye-witnesses have stated
about the manner of assault and the specific role played by each of
the appellants in committing such assault. P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.3,
P.W.4 and P.W.5 are consistent with respect to the roles essayed by
each of the appellants. As per P.W.3 the initial assault was made
upon P.W.5 who fell down unconscious. P.W.5 though has deposed
about the entire episode of assault including the assault upon
Khiro Rawani and Chito Rawani (P.W.3). Even if we rule out the
evidence of P.W.5 so far as the assault committed by the appellants
upon P.W.3 Khiro Rawani is concerned, the other witnesses cannot
be discarded as all had seen the assault from a nearby distance.
The vicious nature of assault as disclosed can also be fathomed
from the postmortem report. Though the primary witnesses are
Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )
related to each other but their evidence cannot be discarded on
such ground in view of the quality of their evidence.
25. We, therefore, come to the conclusion that the
prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable
doubt which aspect has been rightly appreciated by the learned
trial court and thus having found no merit in this appeal the same
is hereby dismissed.
26. Since the appellants are on bail they are directed to
surrender immediately and forthwith before the learned trial court
to serve out the rest part of their sentence.
27. Pending I.As., if any, stands closed.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)
(Arun Kumar Rai, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi
Dated, the 12th day of June, 2025.
A. Sanga /-
