Jharkhand High Court Dismisses Criminal Appeal Against Judgment of Conviction and Order of Sentence Passed

Must Read

SC: No Reservation for in-Service Doctors in Super Specialty Medical Courses for the Academic Year 2020-21

A Full Bench of the Supreme Court held that there will be no reservation for the in-service doctors for...

Madras HC Allows Teacher’s Petition for Incentive Increment on the Basis of Acquired Higher Degree

A teacher in a minority-run educational institute was denied a set of incentive increment owing to her acquiring a...

SC: HC Not to Re-Examine Adequate and Fair Disciplinary Actions Under Art. 226 on Appeal

A Full Bench of the Supreme Court held that the High Court under Article 226 cannot act as an...

SC: Transfer of Cases Under S.406 of CrPC to be Invoked Only in Exceptional Cases

A Single Bench of the Supreme Court held that the transfer of trial from one state to another reflects...

Jharkhand HC Disposes of Writ Petition Filed to Fill up Vacant Seats Reserved for Govt. School Teachers

A writ petition was filed to fill up the vacant seats which were kept reserved for Govt. School Teachers...

Bombay HC Pursues Case Regarding the Nomination of Sole Arbitrator to Settle Partnership Dispute

The High Court heard the matter where disputes had arisen between the parties from their partnership deed. The Court...

Follow us

A criminal appeal was filed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence by the Appellants. The appeal is dismissed with modification in conviction and sentence by Hon’ble Justice Ratnaker Bhengra on the grounds that the incident took place more than 30 years ago in 1987 and four out of nine appellants have died. 

Facts

Santosh Kumar Mahto who was the informant of this case had gone for grazing his ox in the field around 6 am on 06.08.1987. During this Parikshit Mahto, Yudhisthir Mahto, Tinkauri Mahto, Sitaram Mahato, Bhagirath Mahto, Kalipado Mahto, Debilal Mahto, Parikshit Mahto, Karno Mahto and Bhootnath Mahto surrounded the informant Santosh Kumar Mahto and assaulted him with a stick and gupti which resulted in several injuries on both his legs and both hands which lead to a fracture in his right leg and right hand and blood oozed out. After this when Santosh Kumar Mahto raised hulla his brother Vidhyadhar Mahto and Mahanad Mahato, son Gopal Mahto and villager Tarapad Mahto came and rescued him. 

It was stated that the reason for this occurrence was litigation since 1982 with the Accused persons. Based on FIR lodged in Chandankeyari Police Station case no. 62 of 1987 against the accused persons under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 341 and 307 of the IPC. After completing the investigation, charge sheet was submitted and cognizance of the offences was taken and the case was committed to the Court of sessions. After, the conclusion of trial accused persons or appellants herein were convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.

Arguments

Counsel for Appellants made many arguments on the points of evidence. The counsel argued that the ocular evidence that was submitted to the Court did not support the medical evidence. The FIR and the evidence had discrepancies and did not match exactly. Since this case was around 30 years old, the Court in the present scenario did not have essential aspects to inspect or retrospect. 

Considering the fact that it was a trial for attempted murder the evidence provided for by the doctors played an important role in the present case. There had been considerable discrepancies in the results that have been provided by the different doctors. The lack of uniformity fundamentally runs opposite to the doctrine of beyond reasonable doubt. Counsel argued that the evidence of such interested witnesses cannot be taken when there is also a background of enmity or land dispute between the parties. 

Counsel further argued that many persons were grazing the cattle nearby the place of occurrence and it is more shocking as to why none among them were enlisted as prosecution witnesses and examined. In connection to this, the court also agreed with the Appellants on this aspect that the appellants had spent enough time and had done their required time in custody.

On the contrary, the opposing counsels argued essentially that the evidence was enough and that they corroborate. The assault charges and the attempt charges are all valid and that the court should consider the trauma and the injuries of the victim. 

Judgement 

The Court found that the event took place more than 30 years ago in 1987 and four out of nine appellants have died. Remaining appellants are in their 50’s or 60’s and have faced long and hard of trial. The conviction of the Appellants under section 307/149 of IPC is set aside and is modified to under section 324/149 of IPC. The conviction of the appellants under section 148 of IPC remains. Appellants are discharged from the liabilities of the bail bonds. The Court dismissed the appeal with the above modifications made. 

Click here to view full judgement.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

SC: No Reservation for in-Service Doctors in Super Specialty Medical Courses for the Academic Year 2020-21

A Full Bench of the Supreme Court held that there will be no reservation for the in-service doctors for admission into Super Specialty Medical...

Madras HC Allows Teacher’s Petition for Incentive Increment on the Basis of Acquired Higher Degree

A teacher in a minority-run educational institute was denied a set of incentive increment owing to her acquiring a higher degree. The aided private...

SC: HC Not to Re-Examine Adequate and Fair Disciplinary Actions Under Art. 226 on Appeal

A Full Bench of the Supreme Court held that the High Court under Article 226 cannot act as an appellate authority and re-examine the...

SC: Transfer of Cases Under S.406 of CrPC to be Invoked Only in Exceptional Cases

A Single Bench of the Supreme Court held that the transfer of trial from one state to another reflects on the credibility of the...

Jharkhand HC Disposes of Writ Petition Filed to Fill up Vacant Seats Reserved for Govt. School Teachers

A writ petition was filed to fill up the vacant seats which were kept reserved for Govt. School Teachers in terms of Rule 9(i)...

Bombay HC Pursues Case Regarding the Nomination of Sole Arbitrator to Settle Partnership Dispute

The High Court heard the matter where disputes had arisen between the parties from their partnership deed. The Court directed that, in light of...

Madras HC Directs Agriculturist to Pay Insurance Premium Amount Payable Under the PMFBY Scheme

The Madras High Court on 27 November 2020, directed the petitioner to pay the insurance premium amount payable under the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima...

Karnataka HC Releases Accused that Promised Marriage and Obtained Consent for Coitus

The Karnataka High Court granted bail on several conditions to the accused who had promised to marry the victim and obtained her consent for...

Supreme Court Holds in Favour of Narendra Modi in Election Petition Filed by Ex-BSF Jawan

This Appeal to the Supreme Court was filed to decide whether the Appellant had the locus standi to file an election petition before the...

Supreme Court : High Courts Have Sole Authority Under Article 226 To Decide Validity of Tax Provision, Even if Matter Is Sub-Judice Before Income...

A Full Bench of the Supreme Court held that the validity of a provision is a serious matter which could only be decided by...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -