Advertisement
Advertisement

― Advertisement ―

HomeSoma Tarkot @ Soma Torkot vs The State Of Jharkhand on 25...

Soma Tarkot @ Soma Torkot vs The State Of Jharkhand on 25 March, 2026

ADVERTISEMENT

Jharkhand High Court

Soma Tarkot @ Soma Torkot vs The State Of Jharkhand on 25 March, 2026

Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay

                                                         2026:JHHC:8448-DB

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
           Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023

 [Against the judgment of conviction dated 24.08.2018 and the order of
 sentence dated 01.09.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge-III, West
 Singhbhum, Chaibasa in S.T. No.147 of 2012]
                                  ------
 Soma Tarkot @ Soma Torkot, aged about 62 years, son of Late
 Etwa Tarkot, resident of village-Tirilposi, P.O.-Jaraikera, P.S. -
 Jaraikella, District-West Singhbhum
                                        ....   ....      ....      Appellant
                                Versus
 The State of Jharkhand                 ....   ....      ....   Respondent
                                  ------
 For the Appellant              : Mr. Shiv Prasad Singh, Advocate
                                  Mr. Peter Martin T.J., Advocate
 For the Resp. State            : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P.
                                  Mr. Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, A.P.P.

                      PRESENT
    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
                     JUDGMENT

——

CAV On 24/02/2026 Pronounce On 25 /03 /2026
Per- Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.

SPONSORED

1. Heard Mr. Shiv Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for

the appellant and learned P.P. assisted by learned A.P.P.

2. The instant criminal appeal has been directed against the

judgment of conviction dated 24.08.2018 and the order of

sentence dated 01.09.2018 passed by Additional Sessions

Judge-III, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa in S.T. No.147 of 2012,

whereby and whereunder the appellant has been held guilty

for the offences under sections 302/149, 307/149, 353/149 and
Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
1
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

148 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo

imprisonment along with fine of Rs.5,000/- under section

302/149 of IPC along with default stipulation; R.I. for 1 year

and a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 379/149 of IPC along with

default this stipulation; R.I. for 7 years along with fine of

Rs.2,000/- under section 307 of IPC along with default

stipulation; R.I. for 1 year under section 148 of IPC and R.I. for

1 year under section 353 of IPC. All sentences are directed to

run concurrently.

Factual Matrix

3. Factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that the informant

the then O/C. of Manoharpur Police Station received a

confidential information vide memo No.4565 dated 23.09.2010

for taking part in an operation “Black Thunder” against

prohibited moistest organization, which is active in Saranda

Forest Range, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa and a training camp

of Maoists was going on in Saranda Forest Range. Therefore, 8

groups of Arms Forces were formed for executing above

operation under the leadership of Additional Police of

Superintendent, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa along with CRPF

Kobra, C/7 and Jharkhand Jaguar Police Force. It is further

alleged that they proceeded from Rourkella side on 24.09.2010

at about 9:30 pm for the operation. The member of operation

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
2
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

team started searching training center of the prohibited

organization and reached in Saranda forest area and at about

12:00 noon on 26.09.2010, they reached in between the village

Thalkobad and Tirilposi, before Tirilposi nearly forest hillock,

the extremists started firing indiscriminately by their

sophisticated weapons. The member of the operation party

warned them against firing through loud voice but they did

not stop from firing nor they surrendered before the police

personnels rather they started abusing and threatening and

also commanding their members by taking name Jonshon,

Habil Purty, Habil Cherwa, Nelson, Bimal and other comrades

to take position from left side and Muslim, Xavier along with

their groups were directed to take position from right side, the

women comrades were also ordered to take position. After this

order, the informant party also heard saying that Maoists “OK

Nirmal Da”, we are taking our position. Thereafter, all the

Maoists started continuously firing over the police party. In

defence, the police party also started firing as per order of

Additional S.P. In the meantime, the police Jaimal Singh, who

belongs to CRPC Kobra saw an extremist moving from one

position to another position then he entered in the zone of the

extremist showing his bravery. In the whole of night, firing

and counter firing continued and on 27.09.2010 at about 4 am,

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
3
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

striking party No.1 along with S.I. Suresh Ram, O/C Gua, S.I.

Chakravarty Kumar Ram along with CRPF Kobra, Jharkhand

Jaguar came from village Gundijora to help them. Thereafter,

at about 5:30 am, the fire was stopped by the extremists and

the police personnel moved forward and saw some extremists

were running from the camp. It is alleged that two of the

extremists were caught by the police forces, who disclosed

their name as Dursona Bodra S/o- Late Manishg Bodra and

Soma Tarkot S/o-Etwa Tarkot, village-Tirilposi, P.S. Jaraikella,

District-Singhbhum, West at Chaibasa. They also revealed that

they belong to this extremist group from longtime and also

assisted MCC members by providing ration and fixing

explosive. They are also involved in collecting levy and

pasting MCC posters and manufacturing of cane bombs and

fixing land mines etc. It is further alleged that due to absence

of any independent eye-witness at the place of occurrence,

both the apprehended accused persons were lawfully searched

by the police personnels and during search of Dursona Bodra,

one Motorola wireless set and photo Album kept in a bag and

from the possession of Soma Tarkot, explosive substance, 50

meter electric wire, six pencil batteries of torch, 1/2 kg iron

pebbles and a sabbal of iron were recovered. It is further

alleged that from the place of ambush, two mobile sets with

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
4
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

SIM Nos. 9437518779 and 8895030126 were recovered. During

search, the dead body of Cobra Police No.041543551 Jaimal

Sing also found and his INSAS rifle with cartridges were also

looted by Extremists. After some distance, the dead body of

one unknown extremist was also found, who has sustained

bullet injuries on his chest two bullets fired by the police rifle

bearing No. ARSEL No.cz-6155A along with five live

cartridges in the magazine was found.

4. On the basis of above information, Jaraikella P.S. No.08/2010

was registered for the offence under sections 147,148, 307/149,

302/149, 353, 121, 121A, 122, 120-B, 379, 414 of IPC and section

25(1-B)a/26/27/35 of Arms Act and Section 17 of CLA Act and

Section 10, 13 and 20 of UAP Act and sections 4/5 of Explosive

Substance Act against 25 named accused persons and 100 other

unknown Maoists. After conclusion of the investigation,

charge-sheet No.10/10 dated 25.12.2010 was submitted against

Dursona Bodra and Soma Tarkot due to their custody period

of 90 days was about to expire continuing investigation against

other co-accused persons. One accused, Nalla Bhikshapati was

remanded in this case on prayer of I.O. vide order dated

10.12.2010 from Bandgaon P.S. Case No.27/2010 dated

09.10.2010. A supplementary charge-sheet was submitted

against accused, Nalla Bhikshapati on 10.03.2011 continuing

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
5
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

the investigation against other co-accused persons. Later on,

accused Marshal Bhuiyan had also surrendered before the

learned Court of Magistrate and he was also charge-sheeted.

Against all the four accused persons, charge-sheet was again

submitted and cognizance of offence was taken vide order

dated 11.01.2012 and their case was committed to the court of

Sessions vide order dated 18.06.2012 keeping continue

supplementary investigation against other co-accused persons.

After commitment of the case of four accused persons to the

court of Sessions, S.T. No.147 of 2012 was registered. The

accused persons denial from the charges and claimed to be

tried.

5. After conclusion of trial, co-accused Marshal Bhuiya, Dursona

Bodra, Nalla Bhikshapati were acquitted extending them to

benefit of doubt and Soma Tarkot (appellant) was held guilty

and sentenced for the offences as stated above.

6. In course of trial altogether, 10 witnesses have been examined

by the prosecution namely:-

P.W. 1-Subodh Kumar Yadav
P.W.2-Mithilesh Tiwari,
P.W.3-Ranjit Minz, informant
P.W.4-Rasmi Kant Pandey
P.W.5-Dr. Bijay Kumar Pandit
P.W.6-Suman Bhagat
P.W.7-Laxmi Mahto
Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
6
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

P.W.8-Anil Kumar Sharma
P.W.9-Bhairo Manjhi
P.W.10-Ramta Prasad Singh

7. Apart from oral evidence the prosecution has adduced the

following documentary evidence, which are as under:-

Ext.1-Signature of Ranjit Minz on seizure list
Ext.2-Signature of Ranjit Minz on confessional statement
Ext.-2/1-Confessional statement
Ext.-3.Written report
Ext.-3/1-Endorsement on written report
Ext.4-Post-mortem report
Ext.5.-Inquest report of unknown extremist
Ext.6.-Signature of witnesses on inquest report
Ext.7.-Formal FIR
Ext.8.-Case diary containing page Nos.38 and 39 submitted by
ASI Suman Bhagat
Ext.9-Sanction order of D.M., Chaibasa
Ext.10-Sanction order of Law (Judicial) Department,
Jharkhand
Ext.11 S.F.S.L. report.

8. No oral or documentary evidence has been adduced by the

defence.

Submission on behalf of the appellant

9. Learned counsel for the appellant assailing the impugned

judgment and order of conviction and sentence of the

appellant has submitted that the appellant was simply arrested

by the police while he was fleeing from the spot. The appellant

is a resident of same village area namely Tirilposi, he was
Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
7
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

brought from his house by the police and implicated in this

case. The confessional statement recorded before the police

have got no evidentiary value in the eye of law. Learned

counsel further submits that no incriminating articles were

recovered from the possession of the appellant nor he has been

identified as a perpetrator in the crime and firing upon the

police party or in any way trained the Maoists/Extremists of

MCC. Learned trial court on the basis of same evidence has

acquitted another apprehended accused person. Even the

appellant has also been acquitted from charges for some major

offences. Learned trial court has failed to record any specific

reasons and the material evidence showing involvement of

present appellant that he was taking active role against the

police personnels or actively supporting members of

extremists organization. Even if, the confessional statement of

the accused appellant is taken to be true, there is only

admission that he was providing food and other assistance to

the MCC extremists due to the fear and no protection was

extended by the police to them in the MCC infested area. It is

submitted that altogether 10 witnesses were examined in this

case, out of them, P.W.1 Subodh Kumar Yadav, Officer-in-

Charge, Manjhgaon P.S, P.W. 2, Constable No.1273, Mithelsh

Tiwari, P.W.3 Officer-in-Charge Amarpara Police Station

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
8
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

namely Ranjit Minz, P.W.4 Rashmi Kant Pandey, Constable

No.345 were members of the raiding party and they have not

disclosed about any specific role of the appellant in the alleged

offences, for which he has been convicted. Learned counsel

further submits that P.W.5 Dr. Vijay Kumar Pandit has

conducted an autopsy on the unknown extremist, P.W.6

Suman Bhagat is the partial Investigating Officer, P.W.8 S.I.

Anil Kumar Sharma is also a member of raiding party, P.W.9

S.I. Bhairo Minjhi is another I.O. of this case and P.W.10 Ramta

Prasad Singh is the second I.O. of this case, who has submitted

charge-sheet against all four accused persons continuing the

investigation against other co-accused persons. It is further

submitted that the documentary evidence adduced by the

prosecution does not support any recovery of firearm from the

conscious possession of the present appellant. Therefore, there

is no iota of evidence showing the involvement of the present

appellant in commission of murder of the deceased police

personnel or theft of rifle from him. He was also not found in

possession of firearm and has not been alleged by any of the

witnesses that he was involved in any other activities

attracting the offences for which FIR was registered. The

appellant has already been acquitted from the charges under

sections 120-B, 121, 121A, 122 and 414 of IPC and sections 25(1-

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
9
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

B)a, 26/27/35 of Arms Act and sections 10/13/20 of UAP Act.

The learned trial court has clearly held that there was no iota

of evidence to prove that the accused persons were members

of a banned organization and acquitted thereunder. Similarly,

the appellant has also been acquitted from the charges under

section 17 of CLA Act and Sections 3/4/5 of Explosive

Substance Act, It is further submitted that when the appellant

was not found to be a member of MCC (banned Organization),

then how he can be said that he was a member of unlawful

assembly and in prosecution thereof, he was found present at

the place of occurrence. Therefore, mere presence of the

appellant at the place of occurrence on next day of morning

does not attract the provision of Section 149 of IPC in the given

facts and circumstances of the case to saddle him with liability

of murder and attempt to murder of the police personnels in

this case. Learned trial court has misconceived itself while

appreciating and evaluating the evidence of the witnesses

particularly in view of the fact that appellant has been

acquitted from major charges. Therefore, conviction and

sentence of appellant for the offence under sections 302/149,

307/149, 379/149 and 353 of IPC is wholly unwarranted and

beyond the weight of evidence available on record. As such,

the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
10
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

of the appellant is liable to be set aside and this appeal may be

allowed.

Submission on behalf of the State

10. On the other hand, learned P.P. as well as learned A.P.P. for

the State have vehemently opposed the aforesaid contentions

raised on behalf of the appellant and submitted that

admittedly the appellant has confessed that he was a member

of the extremist organization and providing shelter and also

propagating through banners of the Maoists and supplying

them explosive cane bombs and other materials. It is further

submitted that the appellant was arrested on the spot with

incriminating articles therefore, learned trial court has very

wisely and aptly held the appellant guilty with aid of section

149 of IPC, hence, there is no illegality or infirmity in the

impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence of

the appellant calling for any interference by way of this appeal,

which has no merits and fit to be dismissed.

Analysis, Decision and Reasons

11. We have gone through the record of the case along with

impugned judgment and order in the light of respective

contentions raised on behalf of both side.

12. The only point for consideration in this appeal emerges “as to

whether the impugned judgment and order of the conviction

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
11
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

and sentence of the appellant suffers from any serious error of

law calling for any interference in this appeal?

13. For better appreciation of the case, we have to apprise with the

evidence adduced by the prosecution.

P.W.3-Ranjit Minz is the informant of this case.

According to his evidence, occurrence is of 26.09.2010 to

27.09.2010, he was conducting operation “Black Thunder”

against MCC extremists under the leadership of ASP,

Shambhu Kumar. He further states that total 8 groups of

raiding party in the Saranda Forest were constituted inclusive

of police personnels, Kobra force and Jharkhand Jaguar Forces.

He has proved the contents of his written report and further

submitted that in the course of raid from Raurkela to Saranda

forest area including the village Thalkobad and Tirilposi

hillock and forest area, the encounter took place between the

police personnels and the extremists, who were arranging a

training camp to spread the terrorist activities in the area. He

further deposed that after pacifying the firing, a search was

conducted on 27.09.2010, meanwhile the dead body of Kobra

Jawan, Jaipal Singh was found and INSAS rifle and cartridges

were stolen by the extremists. He further deposed that a .303

Rifle was found nearby the dead body of Kobra Jawan and

from where, two extremists making retreat were also

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
12
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

apprehended and from whose possession, Motorola wireless

set and photo albums were recovered and from another

apprehended person, explosive substances etc. were

recovered. The apprehended persons disclosed their name as

Dursona Bodra and Soma Tarkot. A dead body of naxalite was

also found and they also found rice, pulses, rations, utensils,

mobile sets, Naxal uniform and two cane bombs etc. which

were also seized and seizure list was prepared and marked as

Ext.1. He has recorded confessional statement of the

apprehended accused persons marked as Ext.2 and 2/1

respectively and also prepared written self-statement marked

as Ext.3 at the place of occurrence.

In his cross-examination, this witness admits that in his

written report (Ext.3), it is not mentioned that the extremists

were calling name of accused persons Dursona Bodra and

Soma Tarkot. He also admits that the apprehended accused

persons were not arrested from the place of training camp of

the Maoists. He has also failed to assert that from which

direction apprehended accused persons fled away. He has also

failed to state as to which articles were seized from which of

the apprehended accused persons.

P.W.1-Subodh Kumar Yadav is also a member of

raiding party. According to his evidence, he was officer-in-

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
13

2026:JHHC:8448-DB

charge of Manjhgaon P.S. and selected under team for “Black

Thunder” Operation. He further deposed that as per direction

of ASP on 24.09.2010 at about 9:30 pm, his team entered in

Saranda Forest area from Raurkela side searching the possible

training camp of Maoists. They reached in middle of Tirilposhi

and Thalkobad on 26.09.2010 at about 12:00 noon, when they

were at a distance of 6 kms from Tirilposhi, the Maoists started

firing. The police party under his team also in his defence

started firing. When the operation ended due to stoppage of

firing from both sides, they started searching the place and

found one Kobra Jawan, Jaipal Singh died by firing of Maoists.

Two extremists were also apprehended namely Dorsana Bodra

and Soma Tarkot and both were resident of Tirilposhi. He has

also corroborated the recovery of some explosive articles, 50

meters electric wire, 1 kg iron pebbles, Motorola wireless set

etc. The apprehended accused persons also disclosed that they

were working for extremist from a long time and providing

assistance by supplying ration, fixing poster and card and

distributing posters, making cane bombs, fixing land mines

etc. This witness has also supported that INSAS rifle of Jawan

Jaipal Singh was also stolen by extremists. The dead body of

one extremist was also found along with rifle of .303 loaded

with five cartridges in magazine. Apart from the above, some

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
14
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

posters, banners, two cane bombs and eight empty containers

were also recovered and seized.

P.W.2-Mithlesh Tiwari is also a member of raiding

party and was working as constable in Manoharpur P.S. He

has also supported the factum of the firing from extremists as

well as counter firing of police. He has also stated that one

Kobra Jawan, Jaipal Singh died in the said operation. He

further deposed that two miscreants were apprehended and

have disclosed their name Dursona Bodra and Soma Tarkot

and one dead body of extremist was also found with .303 rifle.

He has also supported the recovery of mobile, 50 meters wire,

Motorola set and explosive substance and cane bomb. The

apprehended persons have confessed that they were supplying

ration, explosive substance, fixing banners and land mines. He

has stated that the seizure list was not prepared in his

presence.

P.W.4-Rashmi Kant Pandey was also posted as

constable in Manoharpur P.S. According to his evidence, the

firing started at 12 noon and continued till the whole night

between the police personnels and extremists. In the next day

morning, after end of firing from both sides, a search was

started then two extremists were apprehended and disclosed

their name as Dursona Bodra and Soma Tarkot and from their

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
15
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

possession a Motorola wireless set and pebbles of iron, 50

meters wire explosive substance and 6-7 kg pebbles of iron

were recovered. He further deposed that the food articles were

also found from the camp of extremists along with explosive

substances, one cane bomb, 8 empty canes. The dead body of

Kobra Jawan and one extremist were also found. The seizure

list was prepared by the police and the dead bodies were sent

for postmortem.

In his cross-examination, he categorically admits that

he cannot say as to whether seized articles were seized at the

place of occurrence or not?

P.W. 5-Dr. Bijay Kumar Pandit has conducted autopsy

on unknown male aged about 20/24 years as per inquest

report and found following ante-mortem injuries:-

External Injuries: Fire armed wound 6 in number

(i) On the chest an anterior wall on left side just lateral

to sternum to away in third intercasted space. Size ½”

diameter Margin inverted and blackish colour

(ii) On the anterior chest wall on the left side just

lateral to sternum 4″ away in fourth intercasted space.

Size ½ ” margins inverted and blackish in colour.

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
16

2026:JHHC:8448-DB

(iii) on the anterior abdominal wall just lateral to and

above the umbilicus on left side ½” in margin inverted

and black in colour.

(iv) on the upper half of black of left side 3″ lateral to

T-one vertebra. Size 1-1/2″ diameter margin ragged

and inverted.

(v) On upper half of the back in left side 2″ away on T

4 vertebra size 1-1/2″ diameter margin ragged and

inverted

(vi) On the upper half of back left side between lower

angle of scapula and vertebra. Size 1-1/2″ diameter

margin inverted and ragged.

Internal injuries:

C.N.S: Normal. NAD normal chest left. Lungs

lacerated and collapsed. There is blood clot in side

chest Cavity heart empty. Abdomen: empty. Spleen

ruptured. Diaphragm: ruptured. Intestine: ruptured.

Stomach: intact but empty.

Time since death: more than 12 hours but within 48

hours, as rigor mortis present in both upper and lower limb

receding stage.

Cause of death: Hemorrhage and shocked. Injuries

over caused by fire arm.

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
17

2026:JHHC:8448-DB

The post-mortem report marked Ext.4.

P.W.7-Laxmi Mahto is the Home Guard and he has

simply proved the signature on inquest report.

P.W.8.-Anil Kumar Sharma is the member of raiding

party. He has started raiding against Maoists in Saranda Forest

on 24.09.2010 to 26.09.2010. He further deposed that the

indiscriminate started firing between both sides in which one

Kobra Jawan, Jaipal Singh got bullet injuries and died and one

of the Maoists also died in the police firing. He further

deposed that two accused persons were apprehended and

disclosed their name as Dursona Bodra and Soma Tarkot and

both are resident of Tirilposhi and they were searched by S.I.

Chakravarty Ram and he has also corroborated the recovery

from the accused, Dursona Bodra, a Motorola wireless set and

photo album and from Soma Tarkot, 50 meters electric wire,

pencil torch battery, pebble of iron, sabbal of iron, mobile set

etc.

In his cross-examination, he has admits that recovered

articles were not sealed in his presence.

P.W.9-Bhairo Manjhi is the first Investigating Officer

of this case. According to his evidence on 27.09.2010, he was

posted as S.I. at Jaraikella P.S. and on the basis of written

report of Ranjit Minz , Officer-in-Charge, Manoharpur, he

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
18
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

received charge of investigation of Jaraikella P.S. Case No.8 of

2010. In course of investigation, he has recorded the

restatement of the informant and other witnesses namely

Mithlesh Tiwari and Rashmi Kant Pandey and visited the

place of occurrence situated at about 40 kms away from the

place of occurrence situated at Tirilposhi and Thalkobad. This

place is 4 km away from Tirilposhi in between the forest and

mountain and the road has been constructed by forest

department to connect Tirilposhi and Thalkobad. At that place,

Maoists started firing indiscriminately over the police forces in

which CRPF Kobra Jawan, Jaipal Singh died. During search,

the rifle of .303 was recovered from the place of occurrence. At

the place of occurrence, Maoists were given training to

extremists. The police team had destroyed the camp. He

further deposed that towards north place of occurrence

mountain and dense forest is situated and in south of the place

of occurrence mountain and forest situated in the east side,

village road and mountain is situated and in west side of place

of occurrence mountain forest and after 4 km of that place

village Tirilposhi is situated. The place of occurrence is

situated in a place which is not easily approachable so that

Maoists have chosen for imparting training to their comrades.

He has recorded the statement of Anil Kumar Sharma and

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
19
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

Subodh Kumar Yadav and has also sent the arrested accused

persons to jail and received post-mortem report of unknown

extremist. He has also received original case diary, which was

in the writing of S.I. Suman Bhagat, Sadar Police Station and

prayed for remand of accused Nala Bhikshapati from

Bandgaon P.S. Case No.27 of 2010 dated 09.10.2010. Thereafter,

he has submitted the charge-sheet against the accused persons

Dursona Bodra and Soma Tarkot for the offence under sections

147, 148, 1479, 307, 302, 353, 121, 121-A, 120B, 379 and 414 of

IPC and under Sections 25(1-B)a, 26, 27, 35 of Arms Act and

section 17 of CLA Act and Sections 3, 4, 5 of Explosive

Substance Act and Sections 10, 13 and 16B of UAP Act.

Keeping the investigation continued against other accused

persons, he submitted the charge-sheet against accused Nala

Bhikshapati for the aforesaid offences. He also received post-

mortem report of police Jaipal Singh from Ranchi. Thereafter,

by the order of S.P., he handed over the charge of investigation

to inspector Ramta Prasad Singh.

P.W.6-Suman Bhagat has also conducted partial

investigation in this case. According to his evidence, he has

prepared inquest report of the dead body of the unknown

extremist. Thereafter he was transferred and further charge of

investigation was handed over to O/C Ranjit Minz.

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
20

2026:JHHC:8448-DB

P.W.10-Ramta Prasad Singh is another I.O. of this

case. According to his evidence on 28.07.2011, he was posted as

police inspector in Manoharpur circle and by the order of S.P.,

he received of charge of investigation of the case. In the course

of investigation, one accused, Muslim Ansari was died in

police encounter and he has submitted charge-sheet against

accused Marshal Bhuiyan continuing the investigation against

other co-accused persons.

In his cross-examination, he admits that he has not

conducted substantial part of the investigation of the case and

he also not recorded the statement of any of witnesses and

none of the accused has been arrested by him.

14. The defence of accused persons is denial from the occurrence

and false implication only on the basis of suspicion being the

local villager. However, no oral or documentary evidence has

been adduced by the defence.

15. It appears that the learned trial court after considering the

aforesaid evidence available on record has acquitted three

accused persons namely Nala Bhikshapati, Dursona Bodera

and Marshal Bhuiyan. Till conclusion of trial, no other accused

persons, whose name has been disclosed in the FIR as

notorious Maoists has been arrested nor any charge-sheet was

submitted against them although the investigation was

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
21
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

continued. Learned trial court has not found the present

appellant guilty for the offences under sections 17 of CLA Act

as well as sections 10/13/20 of UAP Act and he was not found

a member of Maoist/Extremist. He has also been acquitted

from the charges under sections 120-B, 121, 121A, 122 and 414

of IPC and sections 3/4/5 of Explosive Substance Act. It

further appears that the learned trial court has found no

evidence against the accused, Nalla Bhikshapati, who was

remanded in this case on the basis of confessional statement

and no material was found against him. Similarly, from the

accused, Dursona Bodra, no incriminating articles alleged to be

recovered has been produced before the court during trial,

hence, it was held that it cannot be said that the accused

Dursona Bodra has any link with the Maoists. So the theory of

police that he was active member of MCC extremists and was

helping them in providing food, fixing land mines,

manufacturing cane bombs etc. cannot be accepted.

16. Learned trial court distinguished the case of the present

appellant, Soma Tarkot on the ground that he was arrested

along with explosive substance and other materials, which

clearly establishes that he was in training camp. Learned trial

court has also held that the present appellant was a member of

unlawful assembly and has acted in furtherance of common

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
22
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

object of the said assembly of Maoists which was assembled

for imparting training.

17. We have considered the very basis for conviction of the

appellant with the aid of section 149 of IPC and twin grounds

that he was found in possession of explosive substance and

another that he was a member of unlawful assembly along

with other accused persons.

Both the above grounds cannot be made the basis for

conviction of the appellant in view of the fact that the

appellant has been acquitted from the charge under sections

3/4/5 of Explosive Substance Act. So far being member of

unlawful assembly is concerned, in the FIR itself there were 25

named accused persons and allegedly disclosing the name of

each other. The witnesses of raiding party examined in this

case have not whispered that the accused persons were taking

the name of each other and also denied in their cross-

examination that the member of Maoists, who were indulged

in firing, were taking the name of each other, then what was

the basis before the learned trial court to held that the present

appellant was a member of unlawful assembly and has acted

in prosecution of the common object of the said assembly.

Admittedly, the present appellant along with other co-accused,

Dursona Bodra were arrested at a distance of 4 kms from the

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
23
2026:JHHC:8448-DB

actual place of occurrence, where the camp was going on as

per evidence of the first Investigating Officer. The appellant is

also a local resident of Tirilposhi and he was not found in

possession of any firearm and none of the witnesses have been

able to attribute any specific overt act against the present

appellant except his presence and recovery of some of the

articles, which were not brought on record during trial of the

case. Therefore, distinguishing features relied upon by the

learned trial court in between the appellant and other co-

accused Dursona Bodra, who has been acquitted, has no

reasonable nexus. While acquitting the another co-accused,

Dursona Bodra, learned trial court has observed at para 28 of

the judgment as under

” Now a days this fact is not a secret that the villagers of

Naxal affected belt specially in Jharkhand is being forced by

the extremists to help them. If, they did not help them, then

they have been tortured by the extremists. It may be possible

that Dursona Bodra was taken by the extremists for helping

them. Because if, he was taking training from Maoists then

certainly he might be in the possession of some arms but no

such type arms or ammunition has been recovered from the

possession of the Dursona Bodra. Therefore, how it can be

said that he was the member of that training camp and he

had animus passendi to attack on the police force.”
Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
24

2026:JHHC:8448-DB

18. We further find that the said criteria is also applicable against

the present appellant because he has been acquitted from the

charges under sections 3, 4 and 5 of Explosive Substance Act

and he was not found planting any area under cane bombs or

involved in manufacturing bombs or other arms or

ammunitions to supply the Maoists. None of the seized

materials from his possession has been produced before the

court during trial.

19. In the above facts and circumstances and the evidence

available against the appellant, we are constrained to hold that

learned trial court has committed serious error of law while

appreciating the evidence available on record against the

present appellant and distinguishing the case of the appellant

from other apprehended accused, Dusona Bodra. There are no

iotas of evidence at all showing that the present appellant was

a member of unlawful assembly along with other named

accused persons against whom charge-sheet has not been

submitted up till now. It is also not proved that the appellant

was belonging to any extremist organization i.e. MCC,

therefore, we find that the appellant is absolutely innocent and

his conviction and sentence is based upon conjecture and

surmises alone and without any concrete evidence.

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
25

2026:JHHC:8448-DB

20. In view of the above, we are constrained to set aside the

conviction and sentence of the appellant passed by the learned

trial court for the charges under sections 302/149, 307/149,

353/149, 379/149 and 148 of Indian Penal Code, which is

hereby set aside and this appeal is allowed.

21. The appellant is in custody, therefore, he is directed to be

released forthwith, if not, wanted in any other case.

22. Pending I.A(s), if any, is also disposed of accordingly.

23. Let a copy of this judgment be sent back to the concerned trial

court through FAX/Email for information and needful.

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

Jharkhand High Court, at Ranchi
Date: 25 / 03/2026
Pappu/- N.A.F.R.

Cr. A (D.B.) No.1650 of 2023
26



Source link