Partly allowed

Raska Murmu v. State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC15 Jan 2020Cr.A(DB)/90/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal, the High Court held that the appellant's assault was committed in heat of passion without premeditation. The conviction under section 302 IPC was set aside and substituted with section 326 IPC. The conviction under the Prevention of Witch Practices Act was confirmed.

What did the court decide?

Set aside conviction under section 302 IPC; affirmed conviction under Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act; convicted under section 326 IPC for ten years rigorous imprisonment; ordered release fr

Raska Murmu Vs State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

(Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction)

¶3

Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 90 of 2008

¶4

--------

¶5

(Against the judgment of conviction dated 20.09.2007 and the order of sentence dated 26.09.2007 passed by the learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge, Pakur in Sessions Case No. 33 of 2007)

¶6

¶7

Raska Murmu, son of Late Charan Murmu, resident of village-Patharia, PS-Litipara, District-Pakur ..... Appellant

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Jharkhand …... Respondent

¶10

----------------- PRESENT

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA

¶12

¶13

For the Appellant : Mr. Kanti Kumar Ojha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ram Prakash Singh, APP ------------------ JUDGEMENT

¶14

Per, Shree Chandrashekhar, J. Dated: 15^th January, 2020 Oral Order

¶15

The sole appellant has been convicted and sentence to R.I for life and fine of Rs. 10,000/- under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act, 1999 he has been convicted to fine of Rs. 1,000/- each on both counts.

¶16

On the basis of the fardbeyan of Charan Kishku which was recorded on 11.11.2006 at about 9:45 a.m, Littipara P.S. Case No. 53 of 2006 was lodged against the appellant for committing murder of Miru Besra. During the trial the prosecution has examined eight witnesses; the informant, who is husband of the deceased, has been examined as P.W.5. His daughter Dular Kishku-P.W.1 and son-in-law Saheb Ram Hembram-P.W.3 have also been examined by the prosecution to prove the charge against the appellant.

¶17

¶18

In his fardbeyan , the informant has stated that in the morning at about 7:00 a.m a panchayati was going on in the courtyard of his house in which his wife, daughter and son-in-law were present. Several villagers, namely, Hopna Hembrom, Shamu Murmu, Polis Murmu and Lilu Murmu etc. were also present in the panchayati. While the meeting was going on the accused-appellant sneaked to his house and brought one iron hasua (kaida) and assaulted his wife on her head. The accused fled away and even after search could not be apprehended by them. In his examination-in-chief, the informant has narrated a similar story about the occurrence. He has deposed in the court that about 8 days before the occurrence son of Raska Murmu had died and one Janguru had told him that his son was killed by practicing witchcraft. That was the reason the accused was nurturing a doubt that the informant’s wife has killed his son by practicing witchcraft. P.W.1 and P.W.3 have also deposed in the court that they have seen Raska Murmu, who during the panchayati had sneaked inside his house and brought one iron hasua, assaulting Miru Besra on her head. They have also stated about Raska Murmu saying that Miru Besra has killed his children. The prosecution witnesses Sona Ram Kishku-P.W.4 and Lakhi Ram-P.W.7 are not the eye-witnesses. The investigating officer-P.W.6 has inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the inquest report. In his cross-examination he has stated that the dead body was drenched in blood, however, he could not seize the hasua .

¶19

The prosecution has sought to prove the charge against the appellant through the medical evidence which according to Mr. Ram Prakash Singh, the learned APP corroborates the ocular evidence. Dr. Bindu Bhushan-P.W.2, who has conducted the postmortem examination on 11.11.2006 at 4:00 p.m, has found two sharp-cut injuries on Miru Besra of the size of; (i) sharp cut injury 6”x3” bone deep with fracture of occipital and parital bone along with expulsion of brain tissues from fracture and, (ii) sharp-cut injury 4”x2”

¶20

¶21

bone deep on the left side of forehead. The doctor has found fracture of occipital bones and the brain matter were lacerated with blood.

¶22

During their cross-examination, P.W.1, P.W.3 and P.W.5 have remained firm. On presence of the appellant at the place of occurrence and assault by him on Miru Besra these witnesses have stood to their grounds. P.W.4 and P.W.7 are independent witnesses. Though they are not the eye-witnesses, they have stated about the appellant nurturing a grudge against Miru Besra.

¶23

However, we are of the opinion that conviction of the appellant under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code is not proper.

¶24

Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code provides that culpable homicide is murder if the act by which the death has been caused falls under any one of the four clauses but at the same time section 300 of the Indian Penal Code provides that culpable homicide is not murder if it can be gathered from the evidences led by the parties during the trial that the offending act is covered under any of the five Exceptions of section 300 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶25

The appellant has assaulted Miru Besra in the heat of passion without premeditation. His children had died and he was nurturing a doubt that by practicing witchcraft Miru Besra has killed his children; one son has died just about 8 days prior to the day of occurrence. Obviously, he was agitated and disturbed and a meeting was convened at his instance. He was told by Janguru that Miru Besra by practicing witchcraft has killed his children. It has come in the prosecution’s evidence that during the meeting he sneaked inside his house and brought one iron hasua and assaulted Miru Besra on her head. The crime weapon has not been recovered by the investigating officer and from the manner of occurrence it can be safely inferred that he has picked up iron hasua which was lying in his house and assaulted Miru Besra and, therefore, his act was without premeditation.

¶26

On such facts, the prosecution has failed to establish that

¶27

¶28

assault by the appellant on Miru Besra constitutes the offence under section 300 of the Indian Penal Code. All that which can be gathered from the aforesaid evidence is that the appellant intended to cause grievous hurt which was likely to cause death and, therefore, he has committed the offence under section 326 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶29

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code dated 20.09.2007 and the order of sentence of R.I for life and fine of Rs. 10,000/- dated 26.09.2007, passed by the learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge, Pakur in Sessions Case No. 33 of 2007 against the appellant, namely, Raska Murmu are set-aside.

¶30

The conviction and the order of sentence under section 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act are confirmed. 12. The appellant, namely, Raska Murmu is convicted and sentenced to R.I for Ten years under section 326 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶31

Mr. Ram Prakash Singh, the learned APP states that the appellant has remained in custody for more than 13 years.

¶32

Accordingly, the appellant, namely, Raska Murmu, who is in custody for more than 13 years, shall be set free forthwith, if not wanted in connection to any other criminal case.

¶33

In the result, Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 90 of 2008 is partly allowed.

¶34

Let a copy of the judgment be transmitted to the Court concerned through ‘FAX’.

¶35

Let lower-court records be transmitted to the court concerned, forthwith.

¶36

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)

¶37

(Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)

¶38

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated : 15^th January, 2020 Tanuj/ N.A.F.R.

Raska Murmu v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raska Murmu v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akhtar Hussain Vs State of Jharkhand

Rohit Nayak Vs State of Jharkhand

Moreng Singh Gagarai Alias Jode Vs the State of Jharkhand

Laldeo Bedia Vs State of Jharkhand

Basudeo Pal Vs State of Jharkhand

Gopal Dutta And Anr. Vs State of Jharkhand