9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (10) TMI 583X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gdung and Rajesh Yadav @ Raju Gowala was chargesheeted by the police. Before the commencement of trial as Jowakim Dungdung died, the other three accused persons, including the appellant, were tried and by judgment rendered by the trial court, all of them were convicted under Section 302/120B of the Penal Code. So far the appellant is concerned, he was awarded death penalty whereas other two accused persons were sentenced to imprisonment for life. All the three accused persons were further sentenced to pay a fine of ₹ 2,500/- each, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. On appeal being preferred before the High Court of Jharkhand, their conviction and sentence have been upheld. The short facts are that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which, it is said to have recovered the aforesaid letter as well as bloodstained balwa and tangi on the disclosure statement made by accused Rajesh Yadav @ Raju Gowala apart from the recovery of one torch cell, knife and a railway ticket from the pocket of the appellant. Upon the conclusion of investigation, the police submitted chargesheet against the aforesaid accused persons, including the appellant, but as accused Jowakim Dungdung died, only three accused persons were tried. Defence of the accused persons was that they were innocent, had no complicity with the crime but falsely implicated in the present case because of animosity. During trial, the prosecution examined several witnesses and got various documents exhibited. Defence, how ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te of the alleged occurrence, the appellant came to the village of occurrence, as would appear from a railway ticket recovered from his pocket, and was seen in the village by Vinsent Toppo (PW 18). IV) Recovery of one torch cell and knife from the pocket of the appellant. V) Upon disclosure statement made by accused Rajesh Yadav @ Raju Gowala, the bloodstained balwa and tangi were recovered by the police So far as the first circumstance, i.e., the motive is concerned, the prosecution has examined Silas Kerketta (PW 1), Fransis Kerketta (PW 2), Albinus Kerketta (PW 3), Patrik Kerketta (PW 4), Bhimsent Kerketta (PW 5), Abhinash Topno (PW 7), Walter Kerketta (PW 11), Mariyanus Dungdung (PW 12), Vinsent Toppo (PW 18) and informant \026 Kajmi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, four to five days before the date of occurrence from Punjab is proved by the railway ticket which was recovered from his pocket by the investigating officer PW 20 in presence of Govind Sao (PW 13) and Benjamin Kullu (PW 14), who have consistently supported the factum of recovery. As regards the fact that the appellant was seen in village Simdega four to five days before the date of the alleged occurrence by PW 18, the best evidence in this regard is that of PW 18 who has categorically stated in court that he had seen the appellant in village Simdega four to five days prior to the date of the alleged occurrence and the same is consistent with his statement before the police. That apart, evidence of PW 18 is corroborated by PWs 1, 7 and 12 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the five circumstances, the prosecution has failed to prove the recovery of blood stained balwa and tangi upon the disclosure statement of accused Rajesh Yadav @ Raju Gowala by credible evidence. The circumstance that the appellant came to his village from Punjab four to five days before the date of the alleged occurrence and was seen by PW 18 in village Simdega cannot be said to be an unnatural conduct on the part of the appellant, as such the same cannot be taken as a circumstance against him. Recovery of one torch cell and knife from the pocket of appellant after the date of alleged occurrence cannot be used as a circumstance against him, especially when neither there is any case nor evidence that the knife recovered was stained with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of Pawan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana, (2003) 11 SCC 241, in which case even though no appeal was preferred by one of the accused, but while hearing appeal of another accused, this Court having doubted veracity of the prosecution case in its entirety, interfered with the conviction of that accused also who did not prefer any appeal to this Court. Thus, we are of the view that accused Rajesh Yadav @ Raju Gowala and Silbestor Dungdung are also entitled to acquittal along with the appellant. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, the conviction and sentence of appellant, accused Rajesh Yadav @ Raju Gowala and Silbestor Dungdung are set aside and all of them are acquitted of the charge. The appellant, accused Rajesh Yadav @ Raju Gowala and Silbe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
