Judgment:
1. Sole appellant Lenga Kudada stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 224/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Singhbhum West, Chaiabasa in Sessions Trial No. 206 of 1998.
2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that the appellant along with one Deori Chatter was serving sentence in Chaibasa District Jail after having been convicted for offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. According to the prosecution case, on 20.12.1987, the appellant along with said Deori Chatter was confined in a Cell Unit where deceased Gulab Chandra Prasad was posted as Warden. The informant (PW 9) Ram Narayan Pandit while taking round of the whole premises at about 2.15 p.m., reached near the Cell in which the appellant was confined. According to him, he called out Gulab Chandra Prasad for getting the report and not getting response, reached at the door of the Cell and inquired from the Deori Chatter about, the warden. According to him, when he was informed by Deori Chatter that the warden was inside the Cell, he went inside to find that deceased Gulab Chandra Prasad was lying inside in injured condition. In the meantime, Deori Chatter attacked him with a stone covered in 'gamchha', which hit him on his side. In the meantime, the appellant who was trying to create a hole in the wall of the Cell, fell upon him and assaulted him. However, the informant could manage to free and blow whistle, which alarmed the jail inmates. The Jail Authorities assembled and found that the appellant along with Deori Chatter was trying to get a hole in the wall of the Cell. They further removed injured Gulab Chandra Prasad having serious injuries on his head, face and ears for his treatment to Sadar Hospital. According to the informant, the appellant and Deori Chatter have assaulted the deceased to facilitate the process of jail break on that day. It was further asserted that the appellant along with Deori Chatter has earlier fled from jail and arrested later on. Injured Gulab Chandra Prasad succumbed to the injuries next day 21.12.1987 in T.M.H. Jamshedpur.
3. Chaibasa police registered a case under Section 224/307/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code against both of them vide Chaibasa Sadar Police Station Case No. 94 of 1987 and finally submitted charge-sheet against both of them under Section 302/224/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Their trial was Initiated after framing charge on 10.4.1989 under Section 224/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. During trial, co-accused Deori Chatter died. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed false prosecution. However, after examining the witnesses, the learned trial Court found and held him guilty under Section 224/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code to sentence him as aforesaid.
4. The present appeal has been preferred on the grounds that the learned trial Court has not considered the improbabilities of the prosecution case. Mr. R.C. Khatri, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, submitted that the entire prosecution version was fabricated and concocted. According to him, there was no eye-witness except PW 9 and even he was not sure who has assaulted the deceased. According to him. PW 9, the eye- witness, has asserted that the stone was being held by dead Deori Chatter, as such, the offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code would not be proved against the appellant. Therefore, the appellant was entitled to acquittal, as he has been held guilty on circumstantial evidence alone.
5. We have anxiously considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the appellant along with the material on record. The prosecution has examined altogether ten witnesses out of which PW 1 Mukhlal Gupta is another convict serving sentence in the said jail. He has supported the prosecution case and asserted before the trial Court that when whistle was blown he along with others reached at the place to find the informant (PW 9) injured and indicating towards the Cell. He went inside the Cell to find the deceased Gulab Chandra Prasad was lying in seriously inured condition and caught hold of Deori Chatter. According to him, the appellant along with Deori Chatter was occupying the Cell. He further supported the prosecution case that a hole was being made in the wall to escape. He admitted truthfully that he has not seen the actual assault being made on the deceased. PW 2 Rameshwar Ram, the Head Warden of Chaibasa District Jail, run towards the Cell on whistle to find the deceased lying in injured condition inside the Cell and the appellant trying to create hole in the wall. He also asserted that the Cell was occupied by the appellant and Deori Chatter when the hole was being made. He asserted that the deceased has disclosed to him that the appellant and Deori Chatter have assaulted him. PW 3 Gupteshwar Ojha, who was serving as Jamadar in the jail on 20.12.1987, supported the prosecution case in details. He also asserted in cross-examination that the injured has indicated him towards the appellant and Deori Chatter as the assailants. PW 4 Bhuneshwar Sharma was Jailer on 20.12.1987. He reached at the Cell on information to find the deceased lying in injured condition in the Cell. He further found a hole inside the wall of the Cell. He did not assert that he has seen the actual incident himself. PW 5 Devnandan Ram is another Warden who supports the prosecution case in details. He was not cross-examined by the defence. PW 7 ws Assistant Jailer oh the date of the occurrence at Chaibasa supporting the prosecution case. He has been cross-examined at length in which he admitted that both the appellant and Deori Chatter were kept in a Cell. He further admitted that the warden usually remains inside the Cell in the aagan. He further asserted that the hole was being made of 10' diameters in the wall. PW 8 Baikunth Singh is another Warden. According to prosecution case, he is a hearsay witness of the occurrence and signed over the seizure list. PW 10 is Dr. Tulsi Mahto, who has conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Gulab Chandra Prasad. The post-mortem report vide Ext. 6, mentions two abrasions and three lacerated wounds on scalp and face. The death according to PW 10 was due to head injuries caused by hard and blunt substance like stone.
6. PW 9 Ram Narayan Pandit has supported the prosecution case in details. He has been cross-examined at length, in which he has supported his earlier fardbeyan before the police. According to him, when the deceased did not respond to his repeated calls, he went towards the Cell and tried to find out when he was also assaulted by Deori Chatter (since dead). He further asserted that he blew whistle on which other witnesses PW 2, PW 3. PW 4 and others arrived to take out the injured from the Cell. According to him, he also found a hole was being made inside the wall. He further asserted that earlier also the appellant and Deori Chatter serving sentence have fled away from jail. He has been cross-examined at length regarding the situation of the Cell, distance and possibility of hearing, alarms raised by any one. He has also asserted that a stone was lying inside the Cell near the tap. PW 7 S.I. Ram Pratap Singh has proved the fardbeyaan. First Information Report and seizure of the clothes, specks, etc, from the place of occurrence. He further seized the bloodstained soil from the place of occurrence vide Ext. 1. He has supported the prosecution case that the appellant being convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code has already broke from the jail reported in Chaibasa Sadar Police Station Case No. 15 dated 31.7.1979 under Section 224 of the Indian Penal Code and he was again arrested vide Muffasil Police Station Case No. 13 of 1985 under Sections 25-A and 26/35 of the Arms Act in which he was being detained in the jail on 20.12.1987.
7. We are of the view that the materials available on the case records clearly disclose that the appellant along with Deori Chatter was confined in the Cell in the afternoon of 20.12.1987 in Chaibasa District Jail when deceased Gulab Chandra Prasad, the Warden, on duty inside the Cell was found grievously injured by the informant, another Warden. This has also come on record that when PW 9 blew whistle finding the deceased lying seriously injured, jail inmates including other convicts and officers arrived there to find that in the Cell a hole was being made to escape, definitely by the appellant and his accomplice. The prosecution has been able to prove that earlier also the appellant has broken the jail and later on arrested in connection with another case under Sections 25-A/26/35, Arms Act. The doctor has found that deceased Gulab Chandra Prasad died due to head injuries caused by hard and blunt substance. All these facts lead to only inference and conclusion that deceased Gulab Chandra Prasad was assaulted with stone resulting in his death. The presence of the appellant along with dead Deori Chatter indicates that they had assaulted the deceased. Since Deori Chatter is now dead, the counsel for the appellant asserted that the appellant may not have assaulted the deceased. However, in the circumstances, where there were only two persons and one now dead, the offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code is positively proved and the appellant as now the sole person left should face the consequences. The learned trial Court has considered all these aspects in his judgment vide paragraphs-11 to 13 at length. We have gone through the impugned judgment minutely. We find that the opinion along with the reasonings given by the learned trial Court are valid and deserves to be affirmed.
8. Having regard to the above mentioned facts and circumstance of the case discussed above, we find that the present appeal has got no merit. Accordingly, this appeal stands dismissed and the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Court against the appellant are hereby confirmed.