Jharkhand High Court
Tinai Baski vs The State Of Jharkhand on 12 September, 2024
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.945 of 2018 [Against the Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence dated 29.05.2018/31.05.2018, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Dumka, in Sessions Trial No.185 of 2013] ------ Tinai Baski, aged about 30 years, S/o-Sri Jalpa Baski, Resident of village Bansduma P.O.+P.S.-Ramgarh, Dist. Dumka. .... .... .... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... .... Respondent ------ PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ------ For the Appellant : Mr. Rohit Ranjan Sinha, Advocate Ms. Manjula Upadhyay, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Vishwanath Rai, Spl. P.P. ------ CAV On 21/08/2024 Pronounce On 12/ 09/2024 Per- Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.
1. Present criminal appeal has been preferred by the above
named sole appellant against his conviction and sentence
dated 29.05.2018/31.05.2018 passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge-I, Dumka in S.T. Case No.185 of 2013 arising
out of Ramgarh P.S. Case No.36 of 2012, G.R. Case No.333 of
2012 (hereinafter called the impugned judgment and order),
whereby and whereunder the appellant has been held guilty
for the offence under sections 302, 201 read with section 34 of
Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life for
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
1
the offence under section 302 of IPC along with fine of Rs.500
and 7 years R.I. and fine of Rs.500 for the offence under section
201 of IPC with default stipulation.
FACTUAL MATRIX
2. The prosecution story as depicted in the FIR is that the
informant’s daughter namely Sonmani Baski aged about 5-6
years along with other children of her village namely Lalpal
Baski aged about 6 years son of the present appellant and
Nimai Baski aged about 4 years went to play outside the house
on 15.03.2012 at about 10:00 AM. It is alleged in FIR that when
the daughter of informant did not return to home, then the
informant interrogated with Lalpal Baski(son of the appellant),
who disclosed that Sonmani Baski is with his father.
Thereafter, the present appellant was inquired by the
informant and villagers who flatly denied the whereabouts of
missing daughter of the informant rather on the next day, he
fled away from his house. On search, no clue of the daughter
of the informant was found. It is further alleged that on
20.03.2012, the present appellant returned to his home then
again the informant along with his son Shyamlal Baski, Gram
Pradhan namely Ramchandra Murmu, Ward Parshad and
other villagers went to ask him about Sonmani Baski then his
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
2
father Jalpai Baski told that Sonmani has been killed and her
dead body is buried in the west-north side field covered with
mud and water (dal-dal). It is further alleged that on
identification of the place by the present appellant and his
father, the dead body of the deceased was recovered and
villagers assaulted the accused persons causing grievous
injuries and thereafter handed over to the police. Accordingly,
the FIR was registered.
3. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted for the
offences under section 302, 201 and 34 of IPC against the
present appellant and his father Jalpai Baski. Both the accused
persons denied the charges and claimed to be tried. After
conclusion of the trial, co-accused Jalpai Baski has been
acquitted extending benefit of doubt but the present appellant
has been convicted and sentenced as stated above, which has
been assailed in this appeal.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant has challenged the
impugned judgment and order mainly on following grounds:
(i) Out of 11 witnesses examined by the
prosecution, there is no eye-witness of the
occurrence. The appellant and his father were
brutally assaulted and have sustained grievous
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
3
injuries and a story of confession before villagerswas concocted.
(ii) The son of the appellant namely Lalpal Baski
aged about 6 years was never interrogated by the
police during the investigation and the
informant has concocted the story about the
disclosure by Lalpal Baski that Sonmani Baski is
with his father(appellant).
(iii) The village pradhan namely Ramchandra
Murmu in whose presence extra-judicial
confession is alleged to have been made by the
appellant leading to dead body of the deceased
has not been examined in this case. Moreover the
alleged extra-judicial confession relied upon by
the prosecution is absolutely irrelevant and
inadmissible in evidence and no recovery of
dead body was effected on the basis of alleged
extorted confession of the present appellant.
(iv)The dead body of the deceased was
recovered after five days of the occurrence i.e.
20.03.2012 from field covered with mud and
water. No dead body can be buried in such a
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
4
field and there is a probability that the deadbody might have been floating with foul smell
and detected and recovered by the villagers.
Thereafter, the appellant was brutally assaulted
and his father was also put under pressure only
with a view to falsely implicate in this case.
(v) It is trite that extra-judicial confession is a
very week type of evidence and no conviction
can be based on it, where such confession is
vitiated from use of force, threat and violence
and outcome of grievous injuries caused to the
accused.
5. In view of the above points of arguments, it is submitted that
impugned judgment and order of the conviction and sentence
of the appellant is fit to be set aside and this appeal may be
allowed.
6. Per contra: learned Spl. P.P. appearing for the State has
vehemently refuted the aforesaid points of argument and
submitted that the prosecution witnesses have been able to
prove the charges leveled against the present appellant beyond
all shadow of reasonable doubt. The learned trial court has
very wisely apprised, scanned and evaluated the un-rebutted
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
5
oral as well as documentary evidence adduced by the
prosecution. There is no valid and reasonable ground to
interfere with the impugned judgment and order with
conviction and sentence of the appellant. This appeal is devoid
of merits and is fit to be dismissed.
7. There is no doubt that conviction of appellant is based on his
extra-judicial confession before villagers. For better
appreciation of this case, it is here pertinent to briefly discuss
the evidence led by the prosecution.
8. P.W. 1 Shyam Lal Baski is the son of the informant.
According to his evidence, on 15.03.2012 at about 11 AM, his
sister Sonmani Baski along with two other children were
brought by Tinai Baski(appellant) from village Anganbadi
Centre, Baskumbha towards the filed, thereafter both the boys
returned to their home but his sister was kept by the appellant.
Thereafter, Tinai Baski returned to his house on 20th March and
upon interrogation with him, he did not disclose in respect of
whereabouts of Sonmani Baski. He further disposed that this
witness along with his father and other villagers, Gram
Pradhan went to the house of the present appellant and asked
as to where he has kept the girl since 15th March then the
appellant started shivering and the village Pradhan slapped
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
6
him twice then he disclosed that he has murdered Sonmani
Baski and buried her dead body in the marshal land(dal-dal) of
his field. His evidence further goes to show that above incident
was communicated to village mukhiya and member of
chairman Jila Parishad. Tinai Baski put out the dead bod of the
girl from his field in presence of several villagers, family
members and Mukhiya Panmuri Murmu, District Councilor
Kanhai, Gram Pradhan Ramsah Murmu. Thereafter, above
incident was reported to the officer in-charge of concerned
police station and they arrived at the place of occurrence and
recorded fardbayan of his father and FIR was registered.
Prior to occurrence, there was some dispute about
landed property but there was no litigation. He has also
admitted that for the first time he came to know from Kanai
Lal Hembram, who is Anganbadi Sevika that the appellant has
taken his sister on 15.03.2012 at about 10:00 AM, the
Anganbadi Centre is just adjacent to his house where his sister
was studying in KG and she used to go the center at 8:00 AM
in the morning and return at 10-11 AM. He further admits that
thereafter he met with the appellant on 19th March at about
4:00 PM but not informed to anyone. He was interrogated on
20.03.2012 and upon interrogation, Tinai Baski confessed his
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
7
guilt and the dead body was recovered and the police arrived
at place of occurrence at 12 PM.
9. P.W. 3, Rafail Tudu has also deposed that Sonmani Baski was
traceless from 4-5 days, Tinai Baski was interrogated by the
village Pradhan and other villagers, who disclosed that he has
killed the child and her dead body was buried in his field
beneath the mud. The dead body was brought by Tinai Baski
from his field.
This witness has also admitted in clear terms in his
cross-examination that prior to recovery of the dead body of
the deceased child, the appellant was brutally assaulted by the
villagers and his one leg was fractured and his father was also
assaulted.
10. P.W. 4 Chunda Hembrom is also hearsay witness and had
deposed that the daughter of the informant was missing from
4-5 days and her dead body was recovered from the field of
Tinai Baski on his confession.
11. P.W.6 Natwar Baski is also a local villager and hearsay
witness. According to his evidence the informant’s daughter
aged about 5 years was missing from 4-5 days. Tinai Baski fled
away from his house. After 4-5 days, Tinai Baski returned to
his home, then he was interrogated and told that the child is
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
8
not with him and after search by the villagers and police, the
dead body of the child was recovered at the instance of the
Tinai Baski.
12. P.W.7 Babulal Murmu is fufera brother of the informant.
According to his evidence, on 17th March, he was informed by
his mamera brother Sandi Baski that his girl child is missing
from home and again on 20th March, the informant
communicated on telephone that the dead body of the girl has
been traced out, then he went to the village Basdang, where
several villagers were surrounding Tinai Baski and on
disclosure of Tinai Baski, the dead body of the Sonmani Baski
was recovered. He is a witness of the inquest report.
In his cross-examination, this witness has admitted
that when he reached at place of occurrence, the police was
present and inquest report was being prepared. He has signed
over the inquest report at about 2:30-3:00 PM.
13. P.W.8 Basu Kisku is wife of the informant. She has deposed
that her daughter was taken by the Tinai Baski while she was
playing with some children and thereafter the dead body was
brought out by the Tinai Baski from his field in the presence of
the villagers and police.
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
9
14. P.W.9 Ramsay Murmu, this witness has disclosed that the field
from where the dead body of Sonmani Baski was found
belongs to his father Madhwa Murmu. The dead body was
found after 4-5 days and at the place of occurrence several
villagers were present along with Tinai Baski, who brought out
the deceased from his filed.
He has not seen the accused and the deceased together
nor at the time of killing her. He has also admitted that he
went to the place of occurrence after receiving information of
recovery of the dead body at about 12-1:00 PM.
15. P.W. 11 Shikiriya Hembrom, is also witness of the inquest
report. According to his evidence Sonmani Baski aged about 5
years was missing from 15.03.2012. The name of Tinai Baski
was disclosed by his son namely Lalpal Baski and thereafter
Tinai Baski fled away from his home and returned after 4-5
days, then he disclosed that he has killed Sonmani Baski and
disposed of her body in his field under mud. He was also
present at the time of recovery of the dead body at the instance
of Tinai Baski.
In his cross-examination, he admits that Tinai Baski
and his father were assaulted by the villagers before the
recovery of the dead body.
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
10
16. P.W.5 Gandhi Baski is the informant of this case. According to
his evidence, on 15.03.2012 at about 8 AM his daughter
Sonamani Baski along with Lalpal Baski, Sundar and Ashok
went out for playing near palm tree. When his daughter did
not return then he asked from Lalpal Baski, who disclosed that
she has gone with his father Tinai Baski, then he went to the
house of Tinai Baski but he was not present and returned on
20th March. Upon interrogation by the police and the villagers,
Tinai Baski brought them towards a filed, where there was a
pit and dead body of Sonamani Baski was lying therein, which
was exhumed by Tinai Baski.
In his cross-examination, this witness admits that Tinai
Baski is his cousin. There was very cordial relationship with
the accused and his family members prior to the occurrence.
He has further deposed that his daughter was studying in the
village Anganbadi Centre and used to go to the Centre at
08:00 A.M. and return at 12:00 PM, but on the date of
occurrence, she did not go to the Anganbadi Centre. He has
further admitted that the place of occurrence is about 1 Km
away from his house and the said filed was so much muddy
and covered with water that if anyone put his leg , the whole
leg will sink into the mud. The police officer arrived at place of
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
11
occurrence at about 2 PM then the dead body was brought out
but prior to that the villagers have brutally assaulted Tinai
Baski due to which his leg was fractured and both the accused
persons were brought to hospital by the police.
17. P.W. 2, Nishit Kumar Jha, the doctor who has conducted
autopsy of the dead body of Sonamani Baski on 20.03.2012 at
about 4:30 Pm and found following:-
External Examination:–
* Entire body was swollen, skin pilled off,
blisters were present over entire body,
petrification started and very offensive odour
coming from the body. Dry mud present over
entire body, bruise mark present over neck and
upper chest, Face was synosed.
On Dis-section of the body
* Entire internal organs show putrification
changes, gas was present in the body, internal
and external genital area swollen. Rectal Mucosa
prolapsed.
* Smear examination of genital organs shows
absence of spermatozoa, no any active injury in
genital area was noted. Rigor mortis were absent
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
12
and putrification were present in the body. Timeelapsed since death more than 24 hours.
Opinion:-
* In my opinion cause of death is throttling that
result in asphyxia, i.e, de-section of oxygen
supply to brain tissue resulted in death.
In cross examination, this witness has clearly admitted
that tongue was not protruded. It is also admitted that
putrefaction of skin starts after 48 hours of death. This witness
also admits that no bones were fractured/effected. Fracture in
tracheal ring was not found. No nail mark and scratch mark
found externally over the neck.
18. P.W. 10, the Sub-Inspector namely Ashok Kumar is the
Investigating Officer of this case. According to his evidence on
20.03.2012 at about 11 AM, a telephonic call was received by
Gumla Police Station that in village Basdumah, a dead body of
5 years old girl has been found in field covered with mud and
water and excited crowd of villagers are beating to the accused
persons. This witness recorded station diary entry (sanha) and
proceeded at the place of occurrence along with other police
personnels and verified about occurrence. He recorded the
fardbayan of the informant Gandhi Baski and accordingly, a
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
13
formal FIR was registered. He also prepared inquest report of
the deceased in presence of the witnesses. Tinai Baski and
Jalpai Baski were apprehended by the villagers and were
assaulted and handed over to him in injured condition and
also seeing their grievous injuries, they were sent to Sadar
Hospital, Dumka for treatment. In course of investigation, he
recorded the confessional statement of the co-accused persons
and after post-mortem report of the deceased and finding
sufficient materials against the accused persons, charge-sheet
has been submitted against them for the offences under
sections 302 and 201 of IPC.
In his cross-examination, this witness has also
admitted that before his arrival at the place of occurrence, the
dead body was brought out from the muddy filed and on that
time Tinai Baski was under unconscious state. He also noticed
that there was mud over the head area of the dead body and
other parts were covered with mud. He has not inspected the
area of dal-dal field, where from the dead body was brought
out. He also got injury report of both the accused persons from
Sadar Hospital and noticed that legs of both accused persons
were fractured.
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
14
19. The aforesaid discussion of prosecution evidence unerringly
points out the following facts:-
(i) There is no eye-witness of the occurrence and
the case and the prosecution hinges upon
circumstantial evidence alone.
(ii) The prosecution has relied upon the
following circumstances, the victim girl went to
play outside the village along with the son of the
informant namely Lalpal Baski
(iii) Other boys returned to home except the
victim girl and the son of the appellant was
interrogated by the informant then he disclosed
that Sonmani Baski was staying with his father.
(iv) The present appellant was interrogated by
the informant but denied his presence with the
daughter of the informant on the alleged date of
occurrence.
(v) After 4-5 days of the missing child, the
present appellant returned to home then in the
presence of Mukhiya, Gram Pradhan and
District Councilor and several villagers, the
appellant was interrogated strictly by using force
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
15
i.e. extra-judicial confession of the appellant,then he disclosed that he has killed the deceased
and concealed the dead body in his field covered
with mud and water.
(vi) The dead body of the deceased was brought
out in the presence of the villagers by the
accused/appellant.
(vii) After recovery of the dead body, the
incident was communicated to the local police
station.
(viii) Inquest report and post-mortem report of
the deceased were prepared.
(ix) In the opinion of the doctor, who conducted
autopsy upon the dead body, the cause of death
is opined to be throttling/strangulation.
20. On the basis of above circumstances, the learned trial has held
the appellant guilty for the offences under sections 302 and 201
of IPC and sentenced him.
21. In the case of Kalinga v State of Karnataka, (2024) 4 SCC 735
wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court held as under:
“16. It is no more res-integra that an extra-judicial
confession must be accepted with great care and
caution. If it is not supported by other evidence onCr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
16
record, it fails to inspire confidence and in such a
case, it shall not be treated as a strong piece of
evidence for the purpose of arriving at the
conclusion of guilt. Furthermore, the extent of
acceptability of an extra-judicial confession depends
on the trustworthiness of the witness before whom it
is given and the circumstances in which it was given.
The prosecution must establish that a confession was
indeed made by the accused, that it was voluntary in
nature and that the contents of the confession were
true. The standard required for proving an extra-
judicial confession to the satisfaction of the Court is
on the higher side and these essential ingredients
must be established beyond any reasonable doubt.
The standard becomes even higher when the entire
case of the prosecution necessarily rests on the extra-
judicial confession.
22. The law with regard to extra-judicial confession has been
succinctly discussed in the case of Munna Kumar Upadhyay @
Munna Upadhya Vs. State of Andra Pradesh through public
prosecutor, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh reported in (2012) 6
SCC, 174 wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court referring its earlier
judgments observed as under:-
“56. This Court has had the occasion to discuss the
effect of extra-judicial confessions in a number of
decisions. In Balwinder Singh v. State of
Punjab [1995 Supp (4) SCC 259] this Court stated the
principle that:
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
17
“10. An extra-judicial confession by its very nature is
rather a weak type of evidence and requires
appreciation with a great deal of care and caution.
Where an extra-judicial confession is surrounded by
suspicious circumstances, its credibility becomes
doubtful and it loses its importance.”
“57. In Pakkirisamy v. State of T.N. (1997) 8 SCC 158
the Court held that:
“8. … It is well settled that it is a rule of
caution where the court would generally look for an
independent reliable corroboration before placing
any reliance upon such extra-judicial confession.”
“58. Again, in Kavita v. State of T.N. (1998) 6 SCC
108 the Court stated the dictum that:
“4. There is no doubt that convictions can be
based on extra-judicial confession but it is well
settled that in the very nature of things, it is a weak
piece of evidence. It is to be proved just like any
other fact and the value thereof depends upon the
veracity of the witness to whom it is made.”
“59. While explaining the dimensions of the
principles governing the admissibility and
evidentiary value of an extra-judicial confession, this
Court in State of Rajasthan v. Raja Ram (2003) 8
SCC 180 stated the principle that:
“19. An extra-judicial confession, if voluntary
and true and made in a fit state of mind, can be
relied upon by the court. The confession will have to
be proved like any other fact. The value of the
evidence as to confession, like any other evidence,
depends upon the veracity of the witness to whom it
has been made.”
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
18
The Court further expressed the view that:
“19. … Such a confession can be relied upon
and conviction can be founded thereon if the
evidence about the confession comes from the mouth
of witnesses who appear to be unbiased, not even
remotely inimical to the accused, and in respect of
whom nothing is brought out which may tend to
indicate that he may have a motive of attributing an
untruthful statement to the accused….”
“60. In Aloke Nath Dutta v. State of W.B. (2007) 12
SCC 230, the Court, while holding that reliance on
extra-judicial confession by the lower courts in
absence of other corroborating material, was
unjustified, observed:
“87. Confession ordinarily is admissible in
evidence. It is a relevant fact. It can be acted upon.
Confession may under certain circumstances and
subject to law laid down by the superior judiciary
from time to time form the basis for conviction. It is,
however, trite that for the said purpose the court has
to satisfy itself in regard to: (i) voluntariness of the
confession; (ii) truthfulness of the confession; (iii)
corroboration.
“89. A detailed confession which would
otherwise be within the special knowledge of the
accused may itself be not sufficient to raise a
presumption that confession is a truthful one. Main
features of a confession are required to be verified. If
it is not done, no conviction can be based only on the
sole basis thereof.”
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
19
“61. Accepting the admissibility of the extra-judicial
confession, the Court in Sansar Chand v. State of
Rajasthan [(2010) 10 SCC 604 held that:-
“29. There is no absolute rule that an extra-
judicial confession can never be the basis of a
conviction, although ordinarily an extra-judicial
confession should be corroborated by some other
material.
23. From the above discussion, the principle propounded by the
Hon’ble Apex court transpires that an extra-judicial confession
is a week type of evidence, however, the court can still convict
someone based on extra-judicial confession, if it is proved to be
voluntarily, truthful, and free of inducement threat or promise
as per provision of section 24 of the Evidence Act. The court
also considers the circumstances in which the confession was
made and the reliability of the confession, if the confession is
circumstantial and the prosecution case is based solely on it,
the accused cannot be convicted unless the prosecution
completes the chain of circumstances. Therefore, the extra-
judicial confession must be of “sterling quality”.
24. In the present case, extra-judicial confession is essentially
based on the deposition of informant (PW 5) Gandhi Baski.
According to him, on the very day of occurrence i.e. 15.03.2012
when the informant’s daughter did not return to home then he
asked with the son of the appellant namely Lalpal Baski (aged
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
20
about 4 ½ years) who disclosed that she is with his father . On
the same day, the informant went to the house of the appellant
then he replied that he does not know about the daughter of
the informant. After 4-5 days when the present appellant
returned to his home then the informant along with village
Pradhan Ramchandra Murmu and other villagers interrogated
with the appellant and also slapped and put under danger of
life then he disclosed that he has committed murder of
Sonamani Baski and concealed her dead body in his filed
covered with mud and water. It is stated that dead body of the
deceased was brought by the present appellant in presence of
villagers and the police. This fact is also asserted by Shyam Lal
Baski (PW 1), Rafail Tudu (P.W. 3), Chunda Hembrom (P.W.
4), Natwar Baski (P.W.6), Babulal Murmu (P.W.7), Basu
Kisku (P.W.8), Ramsay Murmu (P.W.9), Sikinay Hembrom
(P.W. 11), Gandhi Baski (P.W.5) and Nishit Kumar Jha (P.W.
2) but none of the witnesses have been able to prove the exact
words amounting to confession of guilt by the accused or
recorded by any of the witnesses like village Mukhiya, Ward
Parishad or other inimical villagers, who were present at the
scene of occurrence. The confessional statement of the present
appellant recorded by the Investigating Officer after recovery
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
21
of dead body, while he was under custody on 20.03.2012, has
no relevance in the matter either as a confession of guilt or the
recovery of dead body on the strength thereof. The informant
has also failed to offer any explanation as to why he did not
lodge the report before the police immediately, when he had
suspicion for commission of offence by the present appellant
on the date of occurrence itself as alleged in the FIR.
25. Extra-judicial confession of the present appellant does not
appear to be true and voluntarily in nature rather admittedly it
was extorted after giving assault to the present appellant and
his father by the villagers and both legs of the appellant were
fractured in said assault. It is also surfaced that the field
wherein the dead body of deceased has been recovered
belongs to PW 9 Ramsay Murmu. As such, the prosecution has
also failed to prove that the land in question belong to the
appellant. Therefore, the basis of conviction of the appellant in
pursuance to his extra-judicial confession is totally
unwarranted under law being irrelevant in view of the
provisions of sections 24 and 25 of the Indian Evidence Act.
26. So far as the circumstantial evidence proving the guilt of the
appellant is concerned are also not sufficient to furnish
complete link of chain conclusively pointing towards the guilt
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
22
of the present appellant. There is no motive for causing death
of the deceased, none has seen the accused while he was taking
away the victim girl. The claim of informant that the son of the
present appellant Lalpal Baski told that Sonmani Baski is with
his father, is also not proved by the prosecution by examining
as witness. Although, the said child was only about 4-5 years
old and also not interrogated by the Investigating Officer. P.W.
1 Shyamlal Baski, who is none else but son of the informant
has admitted that his sister(deceased) had gone to Anganbadi
Centre for studying, from where she had gone to play with
some children but surprisingly none of the staffs of the
Anganbadi Centre were interrogated during the investigation
and examined as witnesses by the prosecution, which might
have revealed true state of affairs.
27. In our thoughtful consideration of each and every aspect of the
case and evidence available on record, we find that the
prosecution has miserably failed to prove extra-judicial
confession of the appellant to be true and voluntarily rather
outcome of giving grievous injuries to the appellant and his
father. The circumstances relied upon by the prosecution are
also not of conclusive nature rather necessary links of chain are
lacking to arrive at definite conclusion. We find that the
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
23
learned trial court has ignored the nature of extra-judicial
confession of the appellant and the manner in which it was
secured as well as the totality of circumstances of the case and
thus arrived at wrong conclusion about guilt of the appellant.
Accordingly, we find merits in this appeal, which is hereby
allowed and impugned judgment of conviction and sentence
dated 29.05.2018/31.05.2018 passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge-I, Dumka in S.T. Case No.185 of 2013 of
appellant, is set aside.
28. Appellant is in custody, he is directed to be released forthwith,
if not required in any other case.
29. Pending I.A(s), if any, is also disposed of accordingly.
30. Let the copy of this order along with record of trial court be
sent back for information and needful.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Jharkhand High Court, at Ranchi
Date:12 /09/2024
Pappu/- A.F.R.
Cr.A(D.B.) No.945 of 2018
24