Jharkhand High Court
Gopal Mahato vs The State Of Jharkhand on 18 February, 2026
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay, Deepak Roshan
Citation No. ( 2026:JHHC:5897-DB )
Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 757 of 2003
Against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated
08.05.2003 (sentence passed on 09.05.2003) passed by Sri S. N. Pandey,
learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jamtara in Sessions Case No.
100 of 1997/274 of 2001
1. Gopal Mahato, son of late Hakim Mahato
2. Mohan Mahato, son of late Hakim Mahato
3. Bharat Mahato, son of late Mukunda Mahato
4. Anil Mahato, son of late Jhakur Mahato
All are residents of Village Simalbari, P.O. & P.S. Bindapathar,
District Jamtara
... Appellants
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Respondent
----
PRESENT
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
For the Appellants : Mrs. Snehlika Bhagat, Amicus Curiae
For the Respondent (State) : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Ashutosh Pd. Joshi, Advocate
CAV on 11.02.2026 Delivered on 18. 02.2026
—-
Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J. : 1. Heard Mrs. Snehlika Bhagat, learned Amicus
Curiae and Mrs. Vandana Bharti, learned APP assisted by Mr. Ashutosh Pd.
Joshi, learned counsel appearing for the informant.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction
and sentence dated 08.05.2003 (sentence passed on 09.05.2003) passed by Sri
S. N. Pandey, learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jamtara in Sessions Case
No. 100 of 1997/274 of 2001, whereby and whereunder, the appellants have
been convicted for the offence punishable u/s 302/34 of the Indian Penal
Code (IPC) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along
with a fine of 2,000/- and in default of payment to undergo further rigorous
imprisonment for three months.
3. The prosecution case arises out of the Fardbeyan of Tiket Choudhary
recorded on 23.01.1996 in which it has been stated that the elder brother of
1
the informant, namely, Budhu Choudhary after feeding his shepherd was
returning home when Gopal Mahato, Mohan Mahato, Bharat Mahato,
Narayan Mahato, Anil Mahato and others variously armed had assaulted
Budhu Choudhary who after such assault became unconscious. It has been
alleged that when the informant, his brother Adalat Choudhary and Birua
Devi tried to save Budhu Choudhary, Bishu Mahato and Madan Mahato had
committed assault upon them with Farsa and Lathi. The reason for the
occurrence is land dispute.
Based on the aforesaid allegations, Nala (Bindapathar) P.S. Case No.
09/1996 was instituted for the offences punishable u/s 147, 148, 149, 323, 324
and 307 of the I.P.C. On completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was
submitted and after cognizance was taken, the case was committed to the
Court of Sessions, where it was registered as Sessions Case No. 100 of 1997.
Charge was framed against the accused persons for the offence punishable
u/s 148 and 302/149 of the I.P.C. which was read over and explained to them
in Hindi to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
4. The prosecution has examined as many as eight (08) witnesses in
support of its case.
P.W. 1 Bhagwan Murmu has stated that he was in his house when he
heard some commotion and when he came out, he had seen Budhu
Choudhary being assaulted by Gopal Mahato, Mohan Mahato, Kalo Mahato,
Anil Mahato, Bishu Mahato, Narayan Mahato, Yudhishthir Mahato, Madan
Mahato, Bharat Mahato, Duryodhan Mahato. Gopal Mahato and Kalo
Mahato had Lathis, Anil Mahato had Gaita, Bishu Mahato had Farsa,
Narayan Mahato had spear while the rest of the accused had Lathis in their
possession. He and Mohan Hembram had tried to stop the assault, but of no
avail. Budhu Choudhary had later on succumbed to his injuries.
In cross examination he has deposed that he and Mohan did not receive
any injuries.
P.W. 2 Adalat Choudhary has stated that he was in his house when the
accused persons were committing assault upon Budhu Choudhary. Budhu
Choudhary was initially assaulted by Gopoal Mahato with Lathi and
2
thereafter with Lathi, spear and Gaita by Mohan Mahato, Kalu Mahato,
Narayan Mahato and Anil Mahato. He had tried to save Budhu Choudhary,
but he did not receive any injuries though his sister Birua Devi had sustained
some injuries.
In cross examination he has deposed that he had rushed to the place of
occurrence on hearing the cry of alarm of Bhagat Murmu. The accused
persons on seeing them had fled away.
P.W. 3 Tiket Choudhary is the informant who has stated about the
assault committed by the accused persons with various weapons upon
Budhu Choudhary. He was assaulted by Madan Mahato, his sister was
assaulted by Narayan Mahato with a spear, while Dukhu Mahato was
assaulted by Mohan Mahato with a Lathi. The assault had taken place due to
a land dispute.
In cross examination he has deposed that arising out of the same
incident, a case was instituted against him and others by the accused persons.
The place of occurrence is at a distance of 500 meters from his house. They
had rushed to the place of occurrence on the alarm raised by Mohan
Hembram and Ishwar Murmu. He had been told by Bhagwan Murmu,
Mohan Murmu and Charku Murmu that they had not seen the occurrence.
P.W. 4 Dukhan Mahato has stated that he is a shepherd and Budhu
Choudhary had come to give him his lunch. After having lunch, he was
returning with Budhu Choudhary, when near the house of Ishwar Murmu,
there was a quarrel between Budhu Choudhary and the accused persons after
which Budhu Choudhary was assaulted by them. When he had requested the
accused persons not to commit assault, he was also subjected to assault by
Narayan and Mohan. When Tiket Choudhary came to save Budhu
Choudhary, he was assaulted on his head by Bishu with a Farsa. Birua Devi
was assaulted with a spear by Narayan Mahato on her fingers. He does not
know the reason for the assault.
In cross examination he has deposed that he was an employee of Budhu
Choudhary. A case has been instituted against him by the accused persons
relating to the same incident.
3
P.W. 5 Birua Devi has stated that on hearing a cry of alarm, she had
rushed to the place of occurrence with Adalat Choudhary and Tiket
Choudhary and she had seen the accused persons committing assault upon
Budhu Choudhary. She was assaulted by Narayan Mahato with a spear.
Adlat Choudhary, Tiket Choudhary and Dukhan Mahato had suffered
injuries.
In cross examination she has deposed that she has taken the name of
eleven persons as accused. She had not disclosed about the assault to anyone.
P.W. 6 Mishir Hembram has proved his signature on the seizure list
which has been marked as Ext. 1.
P.W. 7 Dr. Damadar Yadav was posted as a Civil Assistant Surgeon at
Additional Primary Health Center, Bindapathar and on 23.01.1996, he had
examined Budhu Choudhary and had found the following injuries on his
person:
i) Oblique injury 1cm x 1/4cm lacerated margins on upper part of
occipital bone. Haematoma was present.
ii) Oblique wounds 1/2″ x 1/4″ scalp deep over parietal part on left
side posteriorly.
iii) Oblique bruise 5″ x 2″ on left side of chest lower and middle part
crepital was present.
The condition of the patient was opined to be very serious. The
injury report has been proved and marked as Ext. 2.
He had examined Tiket Choudhary on 24.01.1996 and had found the
following injuries:
(i) Lacerated wound 4cm x 0.5 cm x skin deep over left side of
frontal bone area margins are irregular.
(ii) Contusion 3cm x 0.5 cm over left scapular region. Red in colour.
All the injuries were opined to be simple in nature caused by
hard and blunt substance. The injury report has been proved and marked as
Ext. 2/1.
On the same day, he had examined Adalat Choudhary and had found
the following injuries on his person:
4
(i) Contusion 1.5 cm x 0.5 cm over right side of forehead. Red in
colour.
(ii) Contusion 2cm x 0.5 cm over left elbow joint. Red in colour.
(iii) Abrasion 1.5 cm x 6 cm over right elbow joint, scab formed.
All the injuries were opined to be simple in nature caused by hard and
blunt substance. The injury report has been proved and marked as Ext. 2/2.
He had also examined Birua Devi and had found the following injuries
on his person:
(i) Lacerated wound 1.5 cm x 0.5 cm over right hand margin are
lacerated.
(ii) Contusion 2 cm x 0.5 cm over frontal part of neck. Red in colour.
(iii) Contusion 1.5 cm x 0.5 cm over wrist joint of left hand. Red in
colour.
(iv) Contusion 3 cm x 0.5 cm over left scapular region. Red in colour.
All the injuries were opined to be simple in nature caused by hard and
blunt object. The injury report has been proved and marked as Ext. 2/3.
On the same day, he had examined Dukhu Mahato and had found the
following injuries on his person:
i) Abrasion 2 cm x 0.5 cm over left leg below knee joint scab found.
The injury was opined to be simple in nature caused by hard and blunt
object. The injury report has been proved and marked as Ext. 2/4.
He has also proved the postmortem report which has been marked as
Ext. 3 with objection.
In cross examination he has deposed that the injuries on Budhu
Choudhary could not have been caused by fall on hard substance.
P.W. 8 Banshidhar Jha was posted as an Officer-in-Charge of
Bindapatha P.S. and on 23.01.1996 Tiket Choudhary with his injured brother
Budhu Choudhary, Adalat Choudhary and sister Birua Devi had come to the
police station where the Fardbeyan of Tiket Choudhary had been recorded.
He has proved the Fardbeyan which has been marked as Ext. 4. He has
proved his endorsement report on the forwarding report and the Fardbeyan
which have been marked as Ext. 4/1 and 4/2 respectively. The formal F.I.R.
5
has been proved and marked as Ext. 5. He had taken over the investigation.
He had recorded the restatement of Tiket Choudhary and had also recorded
the statements of Adalat Choudhary and Birua Devi. He has proved the
requisitions on the injured which have been marked as Ext. 6 to 6/4. On
24.01.1996, he had come to know that Budhu Choudhary had died after which
he had reached Bindapathar Hospital and had prepared the inquest report of
Budhu Choudhary which has been proved and marked as Ext. 7. In the night
of 23.01.1996, he had inspected the place of occurrence which is a village road
near the house of Ishwar Murmu. The house of the appellants and the
deceased are at a distance of 100 meters from the place of occurrence. He had
verified the records and had found several cases instituted between both the
sides. On completion of investigation, he had submitted charge sheet.
In cross examination he has deposed that a counter case was also
instituted by Gopal Mahato on the basis of which Nala (Bindapathar) P.S.
Case No. 10/1996 was lodged. He has proved the Fardbeyan of Gopal Mahato
which has been marked as Ext. A and the formal FIR as Ext. B. He has also
proved the requisition of the injured Gopal Mahato and Manoranjan Prasad
Yadav which have been marked as Ext. C and C/1. In Nala (Bindapathar) P.S.
Case No. 10/1996, he had recorded the statement of the injured Gopal
Mahato, Manoranjan Mahato and Yudhisthir Mahato as well as the statement
of other witnesses. He had received the injury reports and has submitted
charge sheet.
5. The statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
in which they have denied their complicity in the commission of the offence.
6. It has been submitted by Mrs. Snehlika Bhagat, learned Amicus Curiae
that the learned trial court has come to an erroneous conclusion in convicting
the appellants. Despite the involvement of some of the accused persons in the
assault surfacing in the evidence of the witnesses assigning specific role to
them, but without any appropriate reasons, these accused persons have been
acquitted. Mrs. Bhagat, learned Amicus Curiae has submitted that admittedly
there was a previous enmity between both the sides which is evident from
the testimony of PW-8 (I.O.) as well and arising out of the same incident a
6
counter case had also been lodged by the accused persons in which charge
sheet has been submitted. Several of the appellants had also suffered injuries
and therefore it cannot be said that the appellants were the aggressors. The
evidence of the witnesses has been copiously referred to by Mrs. Snehlika
Bhagat, learned Amicus Curiae in order to impress upon the Court that the
case of the appellants stands on a similar footing to those accused persons
who have been acquitted from the charges levelled against them.
7. Learned APP has submitted that PW-1, PW-2, PW-3, PW-4 and PW-5
are the eye witnesses and some are injured witnesses and their evidence
clearly demarcates, the role played by the appellants in committing a brutal
assault upon Budhu Choudhary resulting in his death.
8. Mr. Ashutosh Pd. Joshi, learned counsel for the informant has relied
upon the evidence of PW-3 and has submitted that there is consistency in the
evidence of PW-3 and supported by other eye witnesses indicating the
manner of assault resorted to by the appellants.
9. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective sides and have
also perused the trial court records.
10. The evidence of the Investigating Officer who has been examined as
PW-8 reveals about the previous enmity between the parties as several cases
were instituted certifying the said fact. The incident of assault in the present
case therefore can be attributed to the grudge, both parties had against each
other and what would transpire from the evidence of PW-8 is that some of
the accused persons had also suffered injuries categorizing the assault as a
free fight between both the sides. The learned trial court has acquitted
Duryodhan Mahato and Yudhisthir Mahato on the ground that they have not
been named in the First Information Report. This ground seems to be
erroneous if considered in the touch stone of the eye witness accounts who
have stated about these accused essaying an active role in committing assault
upon Budhu Choudhary. When all the witnesses have consistently stated
about the assault committed by Duryodhan Mahato and Yudhisthir Mahato
their case could not have been considered in a separate pedestal.
7
Be that as it may, the entire gamut of allegations surfacing from the
evidence clearly reveals that the act of assault was not premeditated and was
the effect of long-standing enmity and the same led to a free fight culminating
in injuries suffered by both the sides though unfortunately one of the injured
had died. Such background facts would attract an offence u/s 304 Part II of
the I.P.C. As stated by the learned APP, the appellants have remained in
custody for three months. They are facing the rigors of trial since 1996, and
all the appellants are now aged more than 60 years.
In the case of “Shrikrishna versus State of Madhya Pradesh” reported
in (2026) SCC OnLine SC 42, it has been held as follows:
“6.1. The appellant is more than 80 years of age at present. Since
the appellant is an old and aged person, and in the December of
his life, it would be harsh and inadvisable to send him behind the
bars again at this stage. The courts are not supposed to be
insensitive. Therefore, in view of the advanced age of the
appellant and considering the totality of the facts and
circumstances, while upholding the conviction of the appellant
under Section 304, Part II, IPC, the sentence of the appellant is
reduced to what is already undergone, to be substituted
accordingly.”
Taking a cue from the aforesaid judgment and based on what has been
stated by us above we accordingly modify the conviction of the appellants to
one under Section 304 Part II of the I.P.C. and consequently modify the
sentence as well to the period already undergone.
This appeal stands disposed of.
Pending I.A., if any, also stands closed.
We appreciate the efforts rendered by Mrs. Snehlika Bhagat, learned
Amicus Curiae is assisting this Court and consequently, we direct the
Member Secretary, Jharkhand High Court Legal Services Committee to
extend an amount of Rs. 10,500/- to Mrs. Snehlika Bhagat, learned Amicus
Curiae within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/ production of
a copy of this judgment.
8
Let a copy of this order be handed over to the Member Secretary,
Jharkhand High Court Legal Services Committee.
(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.)
(DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.)
Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi
Dated the 18th February, 2026
MK/N.A.F.R.
Uploaded on 27.2.2026
9