Banshi Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 6433 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Banshi Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand on 14 October, 2025

Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

                                                       (2025:JHHC:31706-DB)


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
          Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.79 of 2003
 [Against the judgment of conviction dated 29.11.2002 and order of
 sentence dated 30.11.2002 passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions
 Judge, Fast Track Court), Jamtara in S.C. No.244 of 2001/25 of 2002]
                                ------
 Banshi Mandal, son of Ananda Mandal, resident of village-
 Majhia, Police Station-Jamtara, District-Jamtara
                                         ....   ....    ....     Appellant
                               Versus
 The State of Jharkhand                  ....   ....    ....   Respondent
                                 ------
 For the Appellant             : Mr. Sanjay Prasad, Advocate
                                Mr. Rajiv Lochan, Advocate
 For the Resp. State           : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl. P.P.
                                ------
                       PRESENT
     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
                      JUDGMENT

------

CAV On 17/09/2025 Pronounce On 14/10/2025 Per- Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.

1. We have already heard the arguments of Mr. Sanjay Prasad,

learned counsel for the appellant and Mrs. Priya Shrestha,

learned counsel for the State.

2. It is to be mentioned at the very outset that the present appeal

was filed by three accused persons, out of them, appellant

No.1, Kanto Gorai and appellant No.2, Ananda Mandal have

been died and their appeal has been abated vide order dated

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

01.09.2025. This appeal is now heard on behalf of the sole

appellant, namely, Banshi Mandal.

3. The instant criminal appeal is preferred by the appellants for

setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 29.11.2002 and

order of sentence dated 30.11.2002 in S.C. No.244 of 2001/25 of

2002 passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast

Track Court), Jamtara, whereby and whereunder, the

appellants have been held guilty for the offence under Section

302/34 of Indian Penal Code and sentence to undergo rigorous

imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.1,000/- each along

with default stipulation.

Factual Matrix:-

4. The factual matrix giving rise to appeal is that on 03.07.2000 at

about 7:00 am, a she-goat of the appellant, Kanto Gorai(since

deceased) while grazing went to the 'bari' of the informant,

which was drove away by Haren Saw(deceased) by throwing

stones. Upon this, wife of Kanto Gorai, Pushpa Devi started

abusing Haren Saw. It is further alleged that Haren Saw tried

to let Pushpa Devi to understand that his maize crops has been

damaged by her she-goat. In the meantime, accused Kanto

Gorai arrived and they also called upon Anand Mandal and

Banshi and all the accused persons armed with lathi came

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

there. It is further alleged that Kanto Gorai gave lathi blow to

Haren with intention to kill him. Thereafter, Banshi and Puspa

also assaulted Haren by lathi push blow on his chest and ribs

due to which Haren became unconscious and fell down on

spot. Upon hearing hulla, some villagers arrived at the place of

occurrence, then all the accused persons fled away. The injured

was brought to hospital at Jamtara for treatment, where he

died. The police also arrived at the hospital and recorded

fardbayan of the informant.

5. On the basis of above information, FIR was registered against

all the accused persons for the offence under section 302/34 of

I.P.C. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was

submitted against the accused persons for the offence under

section 302/34 of IPC. After taking cognizance, the case was

committed to the court of Sessions where S.C. No.244 of

2001/25 of 2002 was registered respectively. The accused

persons have denied the charges leveled against them and

claimed to be tried. After conclusion of trial, the impugned

judgment and conviction and sentence of the appellants was

passed, which has been assailed in this appeal.

6. In the course of trial, altogether 12 witnesses have been

examined by the prosecution, namely:-

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

P.W.1-Vimal Das

P.W.2- Punuchandra Gorai

P.W.3-Jaydeo Gorai

P.W.4-Jip Bhandari

P.W.5-Nandu Gorai

P.W.6-Dr. V.P. Gupta

P.W.7-Jhuki Devi

P.W.8-Prabhat Ranjan Gupta

P.W.9- Mantu Chandra Gorai(informant)

P.W.10-Lalita Gorai

P.W.11-Lal Bahadur Gorai

P.W.12-S.I. Jagat Narayan Singh (investigating officer)

7. Apart from oral testimony of the witnesses, following

documentary evidence has also been adduced by the

prosecution:-

Ext. 1- Fardbayan

Ext.2.-Post-mortem report

Ext.3- Signature of the informant on the fardbayan.

Ext.4-the fardbayan has also been inadvertently

marked as Ext.4 on the evidence of the I.O.

Ext.5- Inquest report.

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

8. On the other hand, the defence has also examined one witness,

Dhananjay Bhandari (D.W.1), who has formally proved the

writing and signature of Dr. V.R.P. Gupta on the injury reports

of accused, Pushpa Devi and Kanto Gorai, which were marked

as Ext. C and C/1. D.W.1 has also proved the writing and

signature of Jagat Narayan Singh, S.I., Jamtara Police Station,

who issued requisition for injury reports of the said accused

persons, which were marked as Ext.D and D/1. Ext.B is the

certified copy of FIR, Jamtara P.S. Case No.112 of 2000, Ext.B/1

is the certified copy of Final From submitted by the police

against the informant party and Ext.A is the Final Form of

Jamtara P.S. Case No.37 of 1999 against Nando Gorain (P.W.5

of the present case and Ors.)

Submission on behalf of the Appellant:-

9. Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that

the occurrence took place on a very trivial issue on grazing of

she-goat in the field of maize of the informant, which

accelerated on spur of moment in exchange of abuse and

assault between the parties. No deadly weapon has been used

by the appellants particularly the appellant, Banshi Mandal

against whom the allegation is that he gave lathi push blow on

the chest and ribs of the deceased along with other co-accused.

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

The post-mortem report of the deceased shows that the injury

near abdomen was found in nature of abrasions, no fracture of

ribs or any abnormal thing was detected. There was head

injury and none of the injuries were found sufficient in

ordinary course of nature to cause death rather death was

caused due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of cumulative

effect of injuries caused by hard and blunt substance. Learned

trial court has absolutely failed to consider that there was no

intention of the appellant to cause death of the deceased rather

there was exchange of assault from both side and FIR being

Jamtara P.S. Case No.112 of 2000 (Ext-B) was lodged by the

defence. The occurrence has taken place in a sudden manner

without any premeditation, therefore, the case of the appellant

comes under section 304 part II of the IPC. The appellant,

Banshi Mandal has remained in custody for more than 9 years

and has sufficiently been punished for his guilt. The appellant

was granted bail vide order dated 18.01.2010. Hence, the

impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence of

the appellant for the offence under section 302/34 requires to

be altered/modified for the offence under section 304 Part (II)

of IPC and the appellant may be sentenced for the period of

imprisonment already undergone.

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

Submission on behalf of State:-

10. On the other hand, learned Spl. P.P. for the State controverting

the aforesaid contentions raised on behalf of the appellant has

submitted that the present appellant along with other co-

appellants (since deceased) have given deadly assault to the

deceased on a trivial issue. The intention to kill the deceased

developed on the spot by hurling instigation by female

accused persons, namely, Pushpa Devi and Bhadu Devi, who

have been acquitted by the trial court. Although, it is not

mentioned in the post-mortem report of the deceased that the

injuries sustained by the deceased was sufficient in ordinary

course of nature to cause death but the injuries sustained on

the stomach of the deceased affecting the liver has been opined

to be cause of death. Therefore, the very nature of injury was

serious, which the offenders were knowing that it was likely to

cause death. Therefore, no lenient view should be taken in

altering the conviction and sentence of the appellant for lesser

offence. This appeal has no merits and fit to be dismissed.

Analysis, Reasons and Decision:-

11. We have gone through the record of the case along with

impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence of

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

the appellant in the light of contentions raised on behalf of the

both side.

12. For better appreciation of this case, it is here pertinent to

briefly discuss the evidence led by the prosecution.

P.W.1-Vimal Das has been declared hostile.

P.W.2-Punuchandra Gorai has claimed to be an eye-

witness of the occurrence and stated that the she-goat of the

accused was grazing in the field of Haren Gorai, which was

protested by him, then Pushpa Gorai and other accused

persons started assaulting by lathi to Haren Saw by pushing

into abdomen, due to which, he died during course of

treatment.

P.W.3-Jaydeo Gorain is also an eye-witness and

specifically stated that the incident has taken place on the issue

of assaulting the she-goat of the accused persons by Haren due

to grazing maize crops in his field. According to him, Anand

Mandal, Kanto Gorai, Bhado Gorai, Pushpa Gorai have

assaulted to the deceased by lathi, however, he has not taken

the name of Banshi Gorai(present appellant).

P.W.4- Jip Bhandari is a formal witness, who has

proved the fardbayan of the informant, which is in the writing

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

and signature of S.I. Mohan Prasad Sinha, the then Officer-in-

Charge, Jamtara, which is marked as Ext. 4.

P.W.5.-Nandu Gorai has also stated that the incident

has occurred on the issue of grazing the maize crops of the

informant by the she-goat of the accused persons, which was

turned out by pelting stones. He has further stated that Haren

Gorai was assaulted by Anand Gorai, Banshi Gorai, Bahdu

Devi, Kanto Gorai and Pushpa Devi with lathi, due to which

he died.

P.W.6- Dr. V.P. Gupta has conducted autopsy on the

dead body of the deceased, Haren Goray on 03.07.2000 and

found following injuries:-

External Examination

External appearance black complexion, average body built, eyes closed pupil dilated, small black hairs or scalp & putrid region, mud mixed in scalp hairs and also found on the body. Eyes closed, pupils dilated, continuative-white, mouth semi open exploring upper four incisor teeth, rigor mortis present in both extremities. External genitalia normal, blood at two ounces present.

Ante-mortem injuries:

(i) abrasion on medial border of right scapula in back ½" x 2 ½" reddish colour

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

(ii) Abrasion over back of right elbow joint 2" x ½"

red in colour

(iii) Abrasion over right leg above lateral malleolus ½" x 1" red in colour

(iv) Abrasion over abdomen in upper part of right side ½" x 3" red in colour.

Internal Appearance:-

(i) On opening scalp and skull: No fracture of skull bones, brain and meninges pale.

(ii) On opening the neck-larynges, phyma introduce normal, mucosa normal

(iii) On opening the chest-No fracture of ribs, lungs pale, heart empty

(iv) On opening abdomen-peritoneal cavity-full of blood and blood clots of varying sizes for 50 gm to 5 gm. Liver-lacerated wound of liver of right lobe 3" x 1 ½" directed Anteroposteriorly in outer surface and interior border present.

Spleen-pale, kidney pale, stomach about 2 ounce semi digested food material present mostly rice, small and large intestine full of gases. Urinary bladder-empty.

Cause of death, according to this witness, is shock and

hemorrhage due to injury of liver caused by hard and blunt

substance.

Time elapsed since death at the time of post-mortem

examination within 12 hours.

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

This witness has proved the post-mortem report,

which is marked as Ext.2.

P.W.7- Jhuki Devi is also an eye-witness of the

occurrence and stated that the occurrence has taken place on

the issue of assaulting the she-goat of the accused persons,

which was grazing in the field of the informant. In the

meantime, Kanto Gorai, Banshi Gorai, Bhado Devi assaulted

Haren by lathi push, which resulted in his death.

P.W.8-Prabhat Ranjan Gupta is a formal witness and

has proved the fardbayan and signature of the informant on

fardbayan (Ext.3).

P.W.9-Mantu Chandra Gorai is the informant and

father of the deceased. According to his evidence, on the date

of occurrence at about 7:00 am, he was in his house and his son

was outside to drive away the she-goat, which entered into his

maize filed. Meanwhile, Pushpa Devi started abusing his son

and entered into scuffle, then after hearing hulla, Anand Gorai,

Kanto Gorai, Bhado Devi and Banshi arrived there armed with

lathi and assaulted to his son by giving lathi push on his

abdomen. Due to which, his son became unconscious and was

brought to hospital, where he died. He has proved the

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

signature on fardbayan (Ext.3), which was recorded by the

police at hospital.

P.W.10- Lalita Gorai has also corroborated the

prosecution story regarding assault given by lathi push to the

deceased by Banshi, Kanto, Anand, Bhado Devi and Pushpa

Devi on the issue of grazing maize crops by the she-goat of the

accused in the field of informant.

P.W.11- Lal Bahadur Gorai has also corroborated the

prosecution story as stated by above witnesses that the

occurrence took place on the issue of grazing maize crops by

the she-goat of accused persons in the field of the informant,

which was turned out by the deceased by pelting stones.

Therefore, he was assaulted by lathi push by the accused

persons, namely, Anand, Banshi, Bhado Devi, Pushpa Devi.

P.W.12-Jagat Narayan Singh is the Investigating

Officer of this case and he has proved fardbayan, forwarding

report (Ext.4). During investigation, he has recorded re-

statement of the informant, Mantu Chandra Gorai. He

prepared inquest report of the deceased in presence of other

witnesses and the father of the deceased. He has visited the

place of occurrence and inspected the same. He found maize

crops of the informant in "bari" wherein she-goat of the

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

accused persons entered while grazing and was also ousted by

the deceased by pelting stones. He recorded the statement of

the other witnesses namely, Nandu Gorai, Jagdeo Gorai,

Punnu Chand Gorai, Vimal Das, Lalita Devi and Pramila Devi

etc. After post-mortem of the deceased, he arrested the

accused persons, Anand Mandal, Pushpa Devi and Bhado

Devi and Mandallain. Banshi Mandal surrendered before the

court and he recorded his statement also. This witness, after

finding sufficient evidence, submitted charge-sheet against the

all the accused persons.

13. We have given thoughtful consideration to the testimony of

the witnesses as discussed above. It appears that the genesis of

occurrence is dispute regarding grazing of maize crops of the

informant by she-goat of the accused persons, which was turn

out by the deceased through pelting stones. Upon this, the wife

of Kanto Gorai started abusing the deceased. In this manner,

the scuffle took place between the parties and a sudden fight

also ensued wherein the accused persons Kanto Gorai and

Pushpa Devi have also sustained injuries and the injury

reports were proved as Ext. C and C/1 and the said report was

also issued on the requisition slip of the same Investigating

Officer. The counter case bearing Jamtara P.S. Case No.112 of

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

2000 was also lodged by the appellant. The injuries as

mentioned in the post-mortem report of the deceased shows

that there was no repeated assault on the vital part of the body

rather in the shape of abrasions but one injury caused, affected

the liver and was responsible for death of the deceased. The

cumulative effect of the facts and circumstances of this case

and the nature of injury caused by the accused persons to the

deceased and also in view of the opinion of P.W.6, Dr. V.P.

Gupta, it appears that the injury sustained by the deceased

were not found to be sufficient in ordinary course of nature to

cause death. As such, the conclusion, which may safely be

drawn lead to commission of offence of culpable homicide not

amounting to murder punishable under section 304 Part (II) of

IPC, because act of the accused persons were done with the

knowledge that it is likely to cause death but without any

intention to cause death or to cause such bodily injury as is

likely to cause death in all probability.

14. In our considered view, learned trial court has not considered

the evidence and materials available on record in right

perspective and held the appellant guilty for the offence under

section 302/34 of IPC. Therefore, the conviction and sentence

of the appellant for the offence under section 302 of IPC is

(2025:JHHC:31706-DB)

altered/modified to section 304 part (II) of IPC for which the

appellant is directed to undergo the sentence of imprisonment

already undergone by him, which is more than 9 years during

pendency of the trial and post conviction.

15. In view of above discussion and reasons, this appeal is

dismissed on merits with modification in conviction and

sentence of the appellant to the extent mentioned above.

16. The appellant is on bail, hence, he is discharged from liability

of bail bonds. The sureties are also discharged.

17. Pending I.A(s), if any, is also disposed of accordingly.

18. Let a copy of this judgment along with Trial Court Records be

sent back to the concerned trial court for information and

needful.

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

Jharkhand High Court, at Ranchi Date:14 /10/2025 Pappu/- N.A.F.R.