Arjun Rawani And Ors. v. State

Jharkhand HC12 Jun 2025Cr.A(DB)/9900268/1995

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Murder S.302 IPC; attempt to murder S.307 IPC; voluntarily causing hurt S.323 IPC; land dispute; private defence plea negated as excessive; reliability of related eyewitnesses; mob of 22-24 armed persons; farsa, rod and lathi injuries; chest-pressing causing death; Karon P.S. Case No. 43 of 1993; Sessions Case No. 69 of 1994; Sessions Judge Deoghar; Jharkhand High Court double-member criminal appeal dismissed on 12.06.2025; appellants ordered to surrender; post-mortem and injury reports corroborating assault.

What did the court decide?

None; convictions and sentences upheld. Appellants on bail directed to surrender immediately and forthwith before the learned trial court to serve out the rest of their sentence; pending I.As. closed. ¶¶106

Arjun Rawani And Ors. Vs State — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶106

Issue for consideration

Whether the appellants acted in exercise of the right of private defence, the defence claiming ownership of the disputed land and alleging that the informant party were the aggressors. +1 more

¶¶101

Court's answer

The land-related documents brought on record by the defence did not conclusively prove that the land belonged to the appellants; ownership of the land remained in a suspended state with neither party able to demonstrate ownership substantially and convincingly.

¶¶98

Ratio / Principle

No witness stated about any aggression by the informant party; the appellants came in hordes armed with dangerous weapons and committed indiscriminate assault, and even assuming exercise of private defence they had exceeded such right, so the defence plea stands negated.

¶¶101

Key takeaways

Eyewitnesses P.W.1 to P.W.5 were consistent as to the manner of assault and the specific role played by each appellant; even if the evidence of P.W.5 regarding the assault on Khiro Rawani is ruled out, the other witnesses who saw the assault from a nearby distance cannot be discarded.ratio¶¶102
Although the primary witnesses were related to each other, their evidence cannot be discarded on that ground in view of the quality of their evidence.ratio¶¶105
The prosecution proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt, the trial court's appreciation thereof was correct, and finding no merit in the appeal it was dismissed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Jharkhand (DB), Criminal Appeal No. 268 of 1995 (P), pronounced 12.06.2025 (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.; Arun Kumar Rai, J.) — Appeal against conviction under Ss. 302, 307 and 323 IPC (Sessions Case No. 69 of 1994, Sessions Judge, Deoghar) arising from an armed mob assault amid a land dispute while the informant party was uprooting paddy seedlings and ploughing, in which Khiro Rawani died after a farsa blow to the head and his chest being pressed, and Barka and Chito Rawani were injured. Held: (i) defence land documents did not conclusively establish ownership, ownership being in a suspended state; (ii) no aggression by the informant party was deposed to, and even assuming private defence the appellants exceeded it, the plea standing negated; (iii) the consistent testimony of related eyewitnesses (P.W.1-P.W.5) as to the specific role of each appellant cannot be discarded for consanguinity; (iv) even excluding the informant P.W.5's account of the fatal assault, the remaining eyewitnesses who saw it from close range suffice. Prosecution case proved beyond reasonable doubt; appeal dismissed; appellants on bail ordered to surrender forthwith to serve the remainder of sentence.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶2

Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 268 of 1995 (P)

¶3

[ 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 ]

¶4

1. Arjun Rawani (since dead)

¶5

2. Baliram Rawani alias Bali Rawani, S/o Huro Rawani

¶6

3. Gogal Rawani, S/o Dhaju Rawani

¶7

4. Mathura Rawani (since dead)

¶8

5. Sukhdeo Rawani, S/o Lalji Rawani

¶9

6. Pabarit Rawani, S/o Dhokri Rawani

¶10

All the above appellants resident of Mouza Teliadih, P.S.Karon, District- Deoghar.

¶11

7. Bishwanath Rawani alias Bishan Rawani S/o Late Maharaj Rawani

¶12

8. Rawan Rawani, S/o Bishwanath Rawani Appellants Nos. 7 and 8 are residents of Village- Situlwa, P.S.- Karon, District- Deoghar. …. …. Appellants

¶13

Versus

¶14

The State of Bihar (now Jharkhand) …. …. Respondent

¶15

P R E S E N T

¶16

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

¶17

For the Appellants : Mr. B.M. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Lakhan Chandra Roy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P.

¶18

For the Informant : Mr. Arvind Kumar Choudhary, Advocate ---------

¶19

C.A.V. on 08/01/2025 Pronounced on 12/06/2025 Per Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.

¶20

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

¶21

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶22

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.

¶23

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.

¶24

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 -2-

¶25

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶26

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.

¶27

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.

¶28

5. The prosecution has examined as many as nine witnesses in support of its case.

¶29

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.

¶30

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

¶31

-3-

¶32

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶33

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.

¶34

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

¶35

-4-

¶36

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶37

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.

¶38

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.

¶39

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

¶40

-5-

¶41

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶42

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.

¶43

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.

¶44

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 -6-

¶45

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶46

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.

¶47

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.

¶48

-7-

¶49

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶50

11. P.W.6 (Dr. Arun Kumar Chakravarty) was the Incharge 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:

¶51

1. The deceased had following antemortem injury:- (i) One oblique lacerated wound 2” x ½” x scalp deep, over middle of skull.

¶52

(ii) Fracture of left arm at its upper part.

¶53

(iii) Bruise with abrasion 1” x ½” over the part of left arm at its upper part.

¶54

(iv) Two lacerated wound 1/3” x ¼” subcutaneous tissue deep and ¼” x 1/6” subcutaneous tissue deep over back of left elbow.

¶55

(v) Oblique bruise 3” x 1” over left side of chest at its lower part.

¶56

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.

¶57

3. On dissection of chest 7^th , 8^th & 9^th 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.

¶58

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.

¶59

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:

¶60

(i) Lacerated wound 8” x ¼” on the middle of the scalp.

¶61

(ii) Lacerated wound 3” x ¼” on the left side of the parietal part of the skull.

¶62

-8-

¶63

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶64

(iii) Penetrating injury 1” x ½” on the lateral side of left upper arm.

¶65

(iv) Lacerated wound 2½” x 1” on the lateral side of left forearm. Bone was looking out from the injury.

¶66

(v) Penetrating wound 1” x ½” x 1” deep on the lateral side of the left thigh.

¶67

(vi) Swelling and tenderness on the left upper arm. Swelling and tenderness on the whole left upper arm.

¶68

(vii) Swelling and tenderness 5” x 3” on the left leg around knee joint.

¶69

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.

¶70

On the same day he had examined Chito Rawani

¶71

and had found the following:-

¶72

(i) Lacerated wound 2” x ¼” bone deep on the middle of scalp.

¶73

(ii) Abrasion 8” x 7” on the left upper arm. (iii) Penetrating wound 1½” x 1” deep in the injury no. (ii).

¶74

(iv) Lacerated wound 2½” x ¼” on the lateral side of right forearm.

¶75

(v) Lacerated wound 1” x 1” on the right scapular region.

¶76

(vi) Lacerated wound ½” x ½” on the left leg near knee joint.

¶77

(vii) Lacerated wound 1” x ½” on the left leg on the calf region.

¶78

(viii) Pain and swelling over the right knee joint.

¶79

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.

¶80

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

¶81

-9-

¶82

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶83

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.

¶84

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.

¶85

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.

¶86

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.

¶87

-10-

¶88

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶89

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.

¶90

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.

¶91

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.

¶92

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).

¶93

-11-

¶94

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶95

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.

¶96

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.

¶97

22. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also perused the Trial Court Records.

¶98

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

¶99

-12-

¶100

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶101

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.

¶102

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

¶103

-13-

¶104

Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:JHHC:15392-DB )

¶105

related to each other but their evidence cannot be discarded on such ground in view of the quality of their evidence.

¶106

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.

¶107

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.

¶108

27. Pending I.As., if any, stands closed.

¶109

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)

¶110

(Arun Kumar Rai, J.)

¶111

High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Dated, the 12^th day of June, 2025.

¶112

A. Sanga /-

¶113

-14-

Arjun Rawani And Ors. v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Rawani And Ors. v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nandu Alias Rama Nand Yadav Vs State of Bihar

Suresh Mahto Vs the State of Bihar

Arjun Yadav Vs State of Bihar

Fakira Munda Vs State of Bihar

Ramdeo Mahto And Ors. Vs State And Anr.

Rajendra Mahto Vs State of Bihar