Jharkhand High Court
Against The Judgment And Order Of ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 15 September, 2025
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
2025:JHHC:28163-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 98 of 2003
[Against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 21.11.2002
and 23.11.2002, respectively passed by learned Additional District and
Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No. II), Civil Court, Gumla in S.T. No. 33 of
2001]
--------
Somra Oraon, son of Charo Oraon, resident of village Khamba, Police Station-
Ghaghra, Dist.-Gumla ... ... Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Respondent
-----
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
--------
For the Appellant : Mr. Diwakar Jha, Amicus Curiae
For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, APP
--------
JUDGEMENT
C.A.V. on 01.09.2025 Pronounced on 15/09/2025
Per- Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J:
The instant Criminal Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order
of conviction and sentence dated 21.11.2002 and 23.11.2002, respectively
passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.
II), Civil Court, Gumla in S.T. No. 33 of 2001 whereby and whereunder the
appellants namely Somra Oraon and Biri Oraon have been held guilty for the
offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. Other co-accused namely Suresh
Oraon and Lalitesh Oraon @ Luthra Oraon were acquitted from the charges
levelled against them by learned trial Court itself.
2. It is pertinent to mention at the very outset that co-appellant namely Biri
Oraon died during pendency of this appeal and his appeal has been abated vide
order dated 12.08.2025.
Factual Matrix:-
3. Factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that on 08.09.2000, in the
night, on the occasion of KARMA FESTIVAL in the village Khambhia
2025:JHHC:28163-DB
Ambatoli, P.S. Ghaghra, District- Gumla, boys and girls of the village were
dancing. It is alleged by the informant Baldev Oraon (P.W.6) that on the said
occasion, relatives of Biri Oraon namely Somra Oraon (present appellant),
Suresh Oraon and Lalitesh Oraon @ Luthra Oraon were also dancing. In the
meantime, an scuffle broke between cousin of the informant namely Sanjay
Oraon and all the above three relatives of the accused namely Biri Oraon which
was pacified and dance last up to 2 o'clock in the night. It is alleged that after
conclusion of the dance ceremony, Sanjay Oraon went to the house of Jinda
Oraon for sleeping. Later on, hearing Halla of the villagers, informant went to
the house of the Jinda Oraon where he saw that accused Suresh, Lalitesh @
Luthra, Somra and Biri were dragging away to the injured Sanjay Oraon out
from the village. It is further alleged that the informant with the help of the
villagers saved Sanjay Oraon from the hands of accused persons and accused
Somra Oraon and Biri Oraon were caught by the villagers. The other two
accused persons namely Lalitesh Oraon @ Luthra Oraon and Suresh Oraon
managed to flee away. It is further alleged that Sanjay Oraon was seriously
injured but alive and disclosed that Biri Oraon and his relatives have assaulted
him by CHHURA (Knife) and BHUJALI, thereafter, Sanjay Oraon succumbed
to death due to severe injuries. It is further alleged that the villagers also
interrogated with the arrested accused persons Somra and Biri but they started
scuffling therefore they have also been assaulted by villagers and sustained
some injuries.
On the basis of above information, Ghaghra P.S. Case No. 96 of 2000
dated 09.09.2000 was registered under Section 302/34 of the IPC against
aforesaid four named accused persons and charge of investigation was
undertaken by S.I., Sri Pramod Ranjan, who after completion of the
investigation submitted charge-sheet against all the accused persons for the
aforesaid offence.
The case was committed to the Court of Sessions where S.T. No. 33 of
2001 was registered. After conclusion of the trial, impugned judgment of
conviction and order of sentence was passed.
4. Heard Mr. Diwakar Jha, learned Amicus Curiae appearing on behalf of
sole appellant and Mr. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, learned APP for the State.
Submissions on behalf of appellant: -
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 98 of 2003
2025:JHHC:28163-DB
5. Learned counsel for the appellant assailing the impugned judgment of
conviction has vehemently argued that altogether eight (08) witnesses were
examined by the prosecution in this case but none of them appeared to be eye
witnesses of the occurrence rather they are hearsay witnesses and also
attempted to prove the dying declaration of the deceased, who has stated that
Biri Oraon assaulted by Bhujali and Knife with the help of his relatives namely
Somra Oraon but there are material contradictions and discrepancies in the
evidence of the witnesses. It is submitted that the confessional statement of
appellant recorded by Police has no evidentiary value at all and nothing
incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the appellant
showing his complicity in the alleged occurrence. It is submitted that the true
fact is that appellant Somra Oraon was brutally assaulted by the villagers only
on the basis of suspicion that he has also assaulted the deceased, and dragged
out by villagers from the house while sleeping. The post-mortem report of the
deceased also shows that he has sustained incised wound by sharp cutting
weapon but it is not opined as to the injuries were caused by the same weapon
or different weapon. It is submitted that the most of the witnesses have stated
that Biri Oraon himself has assaulted the deceased and no overt act or
participation has been attributed against the present appellant. Therefore, there
is no material to convict the appellant with the aid of Section 34 of the IPC.
It is further submitted that P.W.-1 Gosain Oraon was sleeping at the
time of occurrence. According to him, at about 2 o'clock, one Nanhia Oraine
came to the house and told that Sanjay Oraon is lying on earth under injured
conditions. He went there and interrogated with Sanjay Oraon who disclosed
that Biri Oraon and his relatives has assaulted by means of Bhala, Garasa, etc.
Police also arrived at village and seized the blood-stained soil from the place of
occurrence and seizure list was prepared. He is also witness of seizure list. He
has clearly admitted in his cross-examination that he has not seen the
occurrence from his own eyes.
It is further submitted that P.W.-2 Pandey Oraon has also stated that
dance festival was stopped due to scuffle at about 11:00 to 11:30 PM, then, he
returned to his home. Later on, one old lady saw the accused persons were
dragging Sanjay Oraon and told this fact. As such, he is also not an eye witness
of the occurrence.
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 98 of 2003
2025:JHHC:28163-DB
It is further submitted that P.W.-3 Dr. Hemant Kumar has conducted
autopsy on the dead body of the deceased and found following ante-mortem
injuries (i) Incised wound 4" x 1" x 3" over right temporal region and head
with fracture of underlying bone. Brain matter also cut blood clot present.
There was bleeding from right ear and nostrils. (ii) Incised Wound 1 ½" x ½" x
3" over left side of forehead with fracture of underlying bone. Brain matter also
cut blood clot present. (iii) Incised Wound ¾" x 1/3" x ¼" over upper lip. (iv)
Incised Wound 1 ½"X 1/3" x ¼" over left eye-brow. (v) Incised Wound
3"x1/2"x 1/3" over right side of the neck. (vi) Incised Wound 1"x1/2"x1/2"
over left ear. This witness has also stated that after receiving such type of
injuries, the injured person must become unconscious and would not be in a
position to speak anything. Therefore, alleged dying declaration of the deceased
also becomes falsified.
It is further submitted that P.W.-4 Chithuwa Oraon is also a hearsay
witness who went to spot after hearing Halla and saw the dead body of the
deceased Sanjay Oraon.
It is further submitted that P.W.-5 Pahna Oraon has been declared
hostile by the prosecution.
It is further submitted that P.W.-6 is the informant Baldev Oraon who
is also admittedly not an eye witness of the occurrence as per FIR itself. He has
corroborated the version of the FIR and testified that at about 2 o'clock he
heard Halla that Sanjay Oraon has been murdered then he rushed to see the
place of occurrence near the house of Chhedi where Sanjay Oraon was lying
under unconscious position therefore the dying declaration as alleged in the
FIR is falsified by the evidence of this witness during trial. Moreover, he has
stated that one Nanhiya Oraine has seen the occurrence but said Nanhiya
Oraine has not been examined by the prosecution.
It is further submitted that P.W.-7 Mangru Oraon is also a hearsay
witness of the occurrence and admittedly he has personally not seen the
occurrence. He has stated that the occurrence while he was sleeping took place
inside the house of Jinda Oraon. He also states that Jinda Oraon also died after
three days of the occurrence.
Learned Amicus Curiae has further submitted that P.W.-8, S.I., Pramod
Ranjan has conducted investigation of the case who found the dead body of the
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 98 of 2003
2025:JHHC:28163-DB
deceased Sanjay Oraon lying under Imli (Tamarind) Tree where Fardbeyan of
the informant was recorded by him (Exhibit -4). He has also prepared inquest
report (Exhibit-5) and dead body of the deceased was sent to Sadar Hospital,
Gumla for conducting Post-Mortem. He also collected blood-stained soil and
prepared seizure list (Exhibit-6) from the place of occurrence. He also admits
that Somra Oraon was apprehended by the villagers and handed over to him,
who confessed before him his guilt and marked the confessional statement as
Exhibit-7. He also got medical treatment of Somra Oraon and obtained his
injury report (Exhibit-8). It is further submitted that overall witnesses available
on record does not prove any actual role or participation of the appellant Somra
Oraon causing any bodily injury to the deceased by any means of weapon
rather admittedly scuffle arose with Biri Oraon and others and the appellant
being relative of Biri Oraon has been falsely implicated in this case only on the
basis of suspicion and the alleged confessional statement recorded by Police
(Exhibit-7) of the accused appellant is absolutely not admissible evidence and
none of the prosecution witnesses are consistent in this regard. Therefore, the
conviction and sentence of the appellant suffers from serious error of law
committed by the learned Trial Court which is fit to be set aside and this appeal
may be allowed.
Submissions on behalf of State:-
6. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the aforesaid
contentions raised on behalf of the appellant and submitted that the learned
Trial Court has very wisely and aptly acted upon the oral as well as
documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution. It is submitted that the
appellant was apprehended on the spot and he has made extra judicial
confession before the villagers showing his involvement in the murder of the
deceased. It is submitted that the prosecution has also relied upon the dying
declaration of the deceased made just after receiving injuries and at the verge of
unconsciousness and the injuries caused to the deceased also finds
corroboration from the Post-Mortem report of the deceased. Therefore, there is
no illegality and infirmity in the judgment of conviction and sentence of the
appellant calling for any interference in this appeal, which is devoid of merits
and fit to be dismissed.
7. We have gone through the record of case along with impugned judgment
in the light of contentions raised on behalf of respective parties.
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 98 of 2003
2025:JHHC:28163-DB
8. The only point for consideration in this appeal is that "as to whether the
impugned judgment of conviction and sentence of the appellant suffers from
any error of law calling for any interference in this appeal or not?"
Analysis, discussions and reasons: -
9. It appears that out of eight witnesses examined in this case, P.W.-3 and
P.W.-8 are the Doctor and Investigating Officer, respectively. P.W.-2, P.W.-4,
P.W.-6 and P.W.-7 namely Pandey Oraon, Chithuwa Oraon, Baldev Oraon
(informant) and Mangru Oraon, respectively have arrived at the place of
occurrence after hearing Halla at about 2 PM and found the deceased under
injured conditions. There were six incised wounds sustained on the vital part of
the body. The witnesses have admitted that one Nanhiya Oraine came to the
house of the witness P.W.-6 and told that she has seen the accused persons Biri
Oraon, Somra Oraon, Suresh Oraon and Lalitesh Oraon assaulting the deceased
and dragged towards outside. P.W.-6 Baldev Oraon is the informant who is also
not an eye witness of the occurrence rather stated about dying declaration of the
deceased. Apart from above, there is confessional statement of the appellant-
Somra Oraon before police which is irrelevant and barred by provision of
Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act.
10. The overall factual aspects disclosed by the witnesses goes to show that
it was Biri Oraon with whom scuffle took place in the dancing night of Karma
Puja. It is also admitted fact that the deceased after end of the function went to
the house of Jinda Oraon for sleeping and the said Jinda Oraon also died after
three days of the occurrence. It is not the case of the prosecution that at the time
of sleeping, the deceased was along with the appellants rather on the basis of
previous scuffle in the night in between the deceased and accused persons he
was dragged out from his house by villagers and assaulted, which finds
corroboration from Injury report (Exhibit-8) of Somra Oraon. We further find
that the injury sustained by deceased on vital part of the body has been opined
by the Doctor that sustaining such type of injuries, a person must be
unconscious immediately and not able to speak. Therefore, the dying
declaration of the deceased about his assailant also appears to be doubtful.
11. The assessment of overall oral testimony of witness do not disclose any
specific overt act of the appellant Somra Oraon or his involvement in the
alleged occurrence. It appears that the learned Trial Court has failed to properly
appreciate the evidence of witnesses and attached undue emphasis on the dying
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 98 of 2003
2025:JHHC:28163-DB
declaration of the deceased which under the circumstance of the case cannot be
considered to be true and reliable as such arrived at wrong conclusion about
guilt of the appellant.
12. In our considered view, there is no direct or circumstantial evidence
against the present appellant Somra Oraon to prove charge of murder against
him. On the basis of same evidence of witnesses, other co-accused persons as
stated above have already been acquitted by the learned trial Court itself.
13. In view of the above discussions and reasons, we find merits in this
appeal. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence of the
appellant passed in S.T. No. 33 of 2001 is hereby set aside and this appeal is
allowed and the appellant is acquitted from the charges levelled against him.
14. The appellant is on bail; he is discharged from the liabilities of bail
bonds and his sureties are also discharged.
15. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.
16. We take this opportunity to appreciate the assistance rendered by Mr.
Diwakar Jha, learned Amicus Curiae and direct the Member Secretary, High
Court Legal Services Committee to extend the stipulated fees to Mr. Diwakar
Jha within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy
of this order.
17. Office is directed to ensure that a copy of this order is served upon
Member Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee.
18. Let a copy of this judgment along with the trial court record be sent back
to the concerned court for information and needful.
(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.)
(PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.)
Jharkhand High Court
Dated 15/09/2025
Basant/N. A. F. R.
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 98 of 2003
