Binod Manjhi Vs the State of Jharkhand

2026:JHHC:19924

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 555 of 2021

-----

[ Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, dated 30.11.2021 passed in Sessions Trial No. 412 of 2010 arising out of Jaridih P.S. Case No. 07 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 40 of 2010, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Bermo at Tenughat]

¶5

Binod Manjhi, aged about 30 years, son of Durjan Manjhi, Resident of Vill. - Baruwatand, P.O. & P.S.- Jaridih, District- Bokaro (Jharkhand)

¶6

--- --- Appellant

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Jharkhand --- --- Respondent

¶9

For the Appellant : Mr. Dilip Kr. Jaiswal, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, A.P.P.

¶10

PRESENT

¶11

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶12

J U D G M E N T

¶13

By Court

¶14

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Spl.P.P. representing the State.

¶15

2. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, dated 30.11.2021 passed in Sessions Trial No. 412 of 2010 arising out of Jaridih P.S. Case No. 07 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 40 of 2010, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Bermo at Tenughat, whereby the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 323 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 1 year with a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in case of default of payment of fine, he is further directed to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. 3 . The criminal law has been put into motion on lodging of written report by the informant Dilip Kumar Agarwal recorded by the A.S.I of Jaridih Police Station on 11.01.2020

¶16

Cr. Appeal (SJ) No 555 of 2021

¶17

1

¶18

2026:JHHC:19924

¶19

In the said fardbeyan the informant has stated that on 11.01.2020 at 18.30 hours the accused Binod Manjhi came to his plastic chair shop and demanded four chairs on credit. The informant refused to provide credit to which the accused, who was carrying a lathi, inflicted lathi blow on the informant’s head with an intention to kill him due to which he sustained injury on his head and fell unconscious. Thereafter, the accused assaulted him with the said lathi. When nearby shopkeepers assembled there for rescuing the informant, the accused fled away after taking Rs. 1700/- from his shop.

¶20

4. On the basis of the above fardbeyan, the case was registered being Jaridih P.S. Case No. 7 of 2010 dated 11.01.2020 under Sections 341/323/307/379 IPC against the accused.

¶21

5. After investigation of the case, police has submitted charge sheet under Section 323/341/307/379 IPC against the accused. Cognizance of the matter was accordingly taken vide order dated 27.07.2010.

¶22

6. Thereafter, charges were framed on 04.06.2011 against the accused under Section 307/379 of the IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

¶23

7. To substantiate the prosecution story altogether eleven prosecution witnesses have been examined. Their brief statements are as follows:

¶24

I. P.W.1(Dilip Kumar Agarwal) – He is the informant/injured of this case. He has deposed that occurrence took place on 11.01.2010 at about 6.30 P.M. and at that time he was at his plastic chair shop. In the meantime, the accused Binod Manjhi reached there and started demanding chairs on credit and when the informant refused, the accused inflicted a lathi blow on his head due to which the he fell down and the accused continuously assaulted him. Thereafter the accused took Rs. 1700/- from the cash-box of his shop and fled away. He has further deposed that due to the assault he sustained

¶25

Cr. Appeal (SJ) No 555 of 2021

¶26

2

¶27

2026:JHHC:19924

¶28

injuries on the left side of his head and on his left arm. After the occurrence, he was taken to the G.K. Hospital, Jaina More where he recorded his fardbeyan before the police and thereafter he was referred to Bokaro General Hospital. In his cross examination he has stated at para 3 that he has got no acquaintance with the accused and prior to the incident, the accused never purchased any article from his shop and he has never seen the accused near his shop. In para 11 he has stated that at the time of assault no hulla was raised and the accused assaulted him for about 15 minutes and thereafter several shopkeepers reached there and took the informant to the hospital. In para 12 he has stated that he has stated before the police that at the time of occurrence he became unconscious after receiving single blow of danda.

¶29

II. P.W.2(Sajan Agarwal) – He is the friend of the informant and has stated that on the date of occurrence at about 6.30 P.M. he went to purchase ration near the shop of the informant and there he saw the accused was assaulting the informant by danda. Subsequently, several persons assembled there and the informant was taken to G.K. Hospital, Jaina More where he got treated. He has further stated that the accused took away Rs. 1700/- from the cash box of the shop. In his cross examination he has stated that the informant is his friend and he has also got a shop near the shop of the informant. In para 4 he has stated that he knew the accused since last 18 years who is having his home at station road.

¶30

III. P.W.3(Milan Prasad Mahto) – He is a hearsay witness.

¶31

IV. P.W.4(Birendra Prasad) – He is also a hearsay.

¶32

V. P.W.5(Sanjay Prasad Barnwal )- He is also a hearsay witness and did not see the occurrence but saw the informant in injured condition.

¶33

Cr. Appeal (SJ) No 555 of 2021

¶34

3

¶35

2026:JHHC:19924

¶36

VI. P.W.6(Saryu Prasad Agarwal)- He has stated that at the time of occurrence he was at the aangan of his house when he heard hulla and when he reached the place of occurrence, he saw the accused assaulting the informant with a lathi in his hand to which the informant sustained injury on his back and head. After the assault, the accused took Rs.1700/- from the drawer of the shop of the informant. In his cross examination he has stated that he did not give any statement before the Police. In para 5 he has stated that after his reaching the place of occurrence, the assault continued till 5- 7 minutes. In para 18 he has stated that the informant is his nephew.

¶37

VII. P.W.7(Mahesh Agarwal) - He has stated that at the time of occurrence he was at his shop. He came to know from the customer of his shop that crowd has assembled at the shop of the informant. When he reached the place of occurrence, he saw the informant lying on the ground and on being asked, the informant told that accused Binod Manjhi has assaulted him. In his cross examination he has stated that he did not see the occurrence.

¶38

VIII. P.W.8 (Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjit Prasad) - He has also reiterated the prosecution story. In his cross examination he has stated that the police did not record his statement.

¶39

IX. P.W.9 (Ramesh Prasad Agarwal)- He has been declared hostile.

¶40

X. P.W.10(S.I. (retd.) Umesh Prasad Yadav) - He is the investigating officer of the case. He has deposed that on the date of occurrence he was posted as ASI at Jaridih P.S. and on that day he took fardbeyan of the informant at G.K. Hospital. After taking charge of the investigation, he recorded statement of witnesses and arrested the accused after making arrest memo. In his cross examination at para 5

¶41

Cr. Appeal (SJ) No 555 of 2021

¶42

4

¶43

2026:JHHC:19924

¶44

he has stated that none of the witnesses have stated that they have seen the occurrence. At para 6 he has stated that he did not receive the X-ray report of the informant.

¶45

XI. P.W.11(Dr. K.K. Sharma)- He has examined the informant on 11.01.2020 and found following injures:

¶46

“Lacerated injury over skull region 3”x2”x1”. Pain over left head and pain over whole body.” During cross examination he has admitted that the cause of injury may be fall on hard surface.

¶47

8. The prosecution has also adduced documentary evidence as under:

¶48

I. Exhibit -1 – Signature of informant on fardbeyan.

¶49

II. Exhibit-2- Entire fardbeyan

¶50

III. Exhibit-1/2 – Endorsement on the fardbeyan for registration of the F.I.R

¶51

IV. Ext. 2-Memo of Arrest

¶52

V. Ext. 3- Injury Report of the informant.

¶53

9. After conducting full-fledged trial, the learned Trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforesaid.

¶54

10. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that considering the nature of injury, it appears that simple injury has been caused by a danda of 3 feet as per the victim. Further, there is no repetition of blow. It is the first conviction of the appellant and he has been sentenced maximum punishment of R.I. for 1 year with a fine of Rs. 1000/-, although no aggravating circumstances has been brought on record. It has been further submitted that as per the sentencing order, it appears that it is his first offence and since it is a minor quarrel, the Court should have considered the case under 360 of the Cr.P.C.

¶55

11. Learned counsel for the State has supported the judgment of conviction passed by the learned Trial Court and has submitted that there are enough materials against the appellant and the learned Trial

¶56

Cr. Appeal (SJ) No 555 of 2021

¶57

5

¶58

2026:JHHC:19924

¶59

Court has rightly convicted the appellant.

¶60

12. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, it appears that the injury has been caused and corroborated by other witnesses and the injured witness-informant has clearly stated about the assault and thus, this Court finds that the conviction under Section 323 IPC is justified as it is based upon the cogent evidence.

¶61

13. Pursuant to the last order dated 30.06.2026, learned counsel for the State has produced the custody report of the appellant, as per which, he has undergone custody for a period of 1 month and 11 days. Let the custody report be kept on record.

¶62

14. Since the incident is of minor quarrel as has been noted by the Court itself that it has taken place in the spur of the moment and further and also the fact that appellant has undergone custody for 01 month and 11 days as per the report dated 06.07.2027, therefore, the sentencing part is hereby modified to the extent of the period already undergone by him.

¶63

15. With the aforesaid modification in the order of sentence dated 30.11.2021 passed in Sessions Trial No. 412 of 2010 arising out of Jaridih P.S. Case No. 07 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 40 of 2010, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Bermo at Tenughat, the instant criminal appeal stands disposed of.

¶64

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶65

A. Mohanty Jharkhand High Court Dated 07^th July 2026 Uploaded

¶66

/_/2026

¶67

Cr. Appeal (SJ) No 555 of 2021

¶68

6

Binod Manjhi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binod Manjhi v. the State of Jharkhand

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

Subhash Chandra Behra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Prashant Kumar Sahay @ Prashant Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Karma Kachhap Vs State of Jharkhand

Kaili Devi Vs State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Jainul Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mohan Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand