RANCHI, India, Aug. 2 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on July 1:

1. The instant appeal, under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been preferred against the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 06.09.1999 passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Chaibasa, in Sessions Trial No. 244 of 1996 and Sessions Trial No. 157 of 1997, whereby and whereunder, the appellants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302/34 of IPC as also rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 364/34 of IPC. The appellants have further been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years under Section 201/34 of IPC. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

The appellant nos.1 and 3 have been directed to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- under the aforesaid sections and in default of payment of fine, they have to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. However, no fine has been imposed upon the appellant no.2.

Factual Matrix

2. Both the sessions cases have arisen out of one and the same occurrence in connection with Gua P.S. Case no. 10 of 1996 corresponding G.R. Case No. 74 of 1996 and as such, both the trials were amalgamated and the accused persons of both the trials were charged together on 11.6.1998.

3. The prosecution story in brief as per the allegation made in the fardbeyan by the informant, Sukurmoni Deogam (P.W.-4) on 20.02.1996, read as under:

The informant has stated that on 12.02.1996, at 12:30 hours her husband Lakshman Deogam aged about 40 years (deceased) proceeded from his house wearing pant, shirt and Jacket of Indian red colour (Kathai colour) and green cap, for Manoharpur Block for obtaining Caste Certificate in the name of his son Rajaram Deogam for getting him admitted in the residential school at Chhota Nagara, asking the informant that he would come back on Wednesday next. Her husband did not come back at the house on Wednesday, then the informant started making search of him. She made enquiry from her co-villagers and the residents of the vicinity but she did not get any clue of the whereabouts of her husband. Then, she went to the village of her father at Tetlighat and she asked her uncle Lebeya Sidu to make enquiry of the whereabouts of her husband. Aforesaid Lebeya Sidu after enquiry, informed her on 19.02.1996 that on 12.02.1996 at 02:00 p.m. the residents of village Sonapi for some reason or the other had caught hold of her husband at the hillock near Sonapi on the way from Chhota Nagara to Manoharpur and they had taken him to Jungle side for committing his murder. Lebeya Sidu gave further information to the informant that the residents of village Sonapi had also taken Ghasiram Sidu of Tetlighat along with her husband who also did not return home. Lebeya Sidu further disclosed to her that Sukhram Munda of village Sonapi and others had hands in the aforesaid occurrence of abduction of Lakshman Deogam and Ghasiram Sidu. Then she narrated everything to Munda (P.W.3) of her village who also started making further enquiry in connection with the aforesaid occurrence. She had no information as to whether her husband had any enmity with the residents of village Sonapi. She believed that Sukhram Munda and others had abducted her husband for committing his murder.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=oxmqmhTvesiYWZENr9t6HBQS%2Bxk3hlJVS4x3P%2FU%2BZ%2FOlhd3fisysBjO6PG2ThEde&caseno=Cr.A(DB)/331/1999&cCode=1&cino=JHHC010076131999&state_code=7&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.