Sukalu Bhunjia v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court upheld the conviction and life sentence for murder of Sukalu Bhunjia. The court dismissed the appeal and clarified that the acquittal of the appellant's premature release policy remains unaffected by this dismissal.
What did the court decide?
Conviction and sentence upheld; appeal dismissed; premature release status preserved.
What the court decided
J CRLA No.95 of 2005
- 19.02.2021
This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
Heard Smt. P. Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. M.S. Sahoo, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State.
Smt. Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is entitled to be acquitted. She also produced a note of argument and date chart. The same be kept on record.
We have perused the report of the Superintendent, Circle Jail, Koraput vide letter No. 406/CJ//Koraput dated 21.01.2021. The Superintendent Circle Jail has intimated the Court that the sole appellant-Sukalu Bhunjia, S/o. Late Raghunath Bhunjia of village-Telonandigaon, Pujariput, P.S.-Umerkote, DistrictNabarangpur has already been released prematurely on 12.10.2019 as per the Law Department Letter No.70584 dated 04.10.2019.
We have carefully examined the impugned the judgment and the evidences available in this case. The appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life in C.T. No.39 of 2003. He allegedly committed murder of his own younger brother. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge relying upon the evidence of P.W.1 the eye witness, namely-Puran Singh Bhunjia, as corroborated by the immediate post-occurrence witness P.W.2, namely-Hirabati Bhunjia who happens to be wife of the appellant. The extra juridical confession stated by P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.4, P.W.9 and P.W.10; the medical evidence in shape of evidence of P.W.5 the doctor; contents of the postmortem report (Ext.1) and written
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the conviction and death sentence for murder upheld by the Lower Court.
Whether the dismissal of the premature release petition due to the upholding of conviction affects the appellant's prior premature release.
Whether the evidence including eyewitness testimony and forensic reports sufficiently supports the conviction.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Sukalu Bhunjia
- respondent
State
Coram
S.K. Mishra
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court