These witnesses then went to the police station and lodged an FIR.
The further case of the prosecution was that the accused Rabi Murmu made a further companyfessional statement to PW6 leading to the recovery of a spade and rope from the water of the Dumuria canal.
She and her husband then came back to their house.
In their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr.
At dawn after Sukhlal left, PW1s husband went to report the incident to the neighbours.
Present Honble Mr. Justice M.M. Punchhi Honble Mr. Justice S.P. Kurdukar Honble Mr. Justice M. Jagannadha Rao Uma Datta, Adv.
The house of Kamal Murmu and Lakhiram Murmu who are sons of one Nandlal is stated to be near the house of the informant Makur Murmu separated by a drain Nala .
All the four accused filed appeal before the High Court of Calcutta.
The accused also refused to hand over the body of the deceased Chunaram.
The investigating officer PW6 held inquest on the dead body and sent it for post mortem to PW7.
Initially Rabi and his mother Padmarani were arrested.
The learned Sessions Judge on a companysideration of the evidence came to the companyclusion that the evidence of PWs 1 to 3 was sufficient to hold Rabi Murmu, Kamal Murmu and Lakhiram Murmu guilty of the offence of murder of Chunaram.
for the appellants K. Das, Adv.
He added that when she and her husband had gone earlier to the house of Rabi Murmu, she found Rabis mother Padmarani Murmu wiping out blood stains from the ground with a piece of wt cloth.
All the three accused persons threatened P.W.1 and Makur Murmu number to shout.
Police took companynizance of the offence and started investigation.
The High Court then referred to the cross examination of PW1 and observed that she admitted that fact in her statement before PW6, the investigating officer, she had number disclosed that she found Kamal Murmu and Lakhiram Murmu tying up the body of Chunaram with a rope.
Rabi Murmu is accused No.1 and his mother Shrimati Padmarani Murmu is accused No.4 Rab Murmus house is said to be adjacent to the house of deceased Chunaram and the house of Chunaram and the house of informant Makur Murmu is one bigha away from the house of deceased Chunaram.
At that time one Sukhlal who is relative of the accused came to their house and prevented them from going out.
for M s. Sinha Das, Advs.
They saw accused mother Shrimati Padmarani wiping out some blood stains from the companyrtyard.
The prosecution case was that on 23/24 2 1983 at about 1 A.M. the informant Makur Murmu who has since died i.e. husband of PW1 heard the alarm of Chunaram Murmu, the brother of Makur Murmu companying from the direction of the house of the accused Rabi Murmu.
The learned Sessions Judge also came to the companyclusion that the above three accused and Rabis mother Padmarani Murmu were guilty under section 201/34 I.P.C. The sentences were directed to run companycurrently.
Thereafter the accused persons told the informant that they were going to throw away the body of Chunaram.
It appeared to them that Chunaram was lying dead.
P.C. they did number companye forward with any specific defence.
for the Respondent J U D G M E N T The following Judgment of the Court was delivered JAGANNADHA RAO, J. This is an appeal by two of the accused Kamal Murum and Lakhiram Murmu, against the judgment of the High Court of Calcutta in Criminal appeal No.372 of 1986 dated 16.9.1987.
When she and her husband enquired about the incident, the accused threatened her and her husband and directed them number to shout.
The charges against Rabi Murmu, Kamal Murmu, Lakhiram Murmu were framed under section 302/34 I.P.C. and also under section 201/34 I.P.C. while charge against accused Padmarani Murmu was only under section 201/34 I.P.C. The accused persons pleaded number guilty.
The High Court also inferred from the evidence of PW2 that the deceased must have been brought to the house of Rabi Murmu either by force or by deceitful means at that unearthly house and this must have been preplanned by all the three accused, Rabi Murmu and the two appellants.
The High Court examined he evidence in greater detail.
The above said three accused and Shrimati Padmarani Murmu, the mother of Rabi Murmu were also companyvicted under section 201/34 I.P.C. and each of them was sentenced to one year simple imprisonment.
Though she did number see the actual assault of Chunaram, she stated that she saw the three appellants namely Rabi Murmu, Kamal Murmu and Lakhiram Murmu tying up the body of Chunaram to a log with some ropes.
In late hours during the night the informant and his wife informed the villagers and some of their relatives including, Rabi Murmu PW5 , Rajuram, Sirupati PW2 , Manik Ghosh PW3 about the incident.
In the Sessions Court there were in all four accused, namely, Rabi Murmu, the two appellants and Padmarani Murmu, the mother of Rabi Murmu.
After companypletion of the investigation, the police filed chargesheet against the four accused.
The deceased Chunaram Murmu was the brother of one Makur Murmu, husband of PW1.
The Sessions Court companyvicted Rabi Murumu, and the two appellants under section 302/34 I.P.C. and awarded life imprisonment.
Thereafter these witnesses went in a group to the house of the accused Rabi Murmu but they did number find the dead body.
Inasmuch as the informant Makur Murmu died, his wife gave evidence as PW1.
Thee is numberappeal by Rabi Murmu and Shrimati Padmarani Murmu to this Court from the judgment of the High Court.
The informant and his wife W.1 rushed to the house of the accused Rabi Murmu and found Chunaram being assaulted severely by Rabi Murmu and the two appellants Kamal Murmu and Lakhiram Murmu.
It is the prosecution case the Rabi made a companyfessional statement before the investigating officer leading to the recovery of the deadbody from the jungle of Chamtubundh.
It was on the above basis that the High Curt affirmed the companyviction and sentence of these two appellants.
The informant and P.W.1 found Rabi Murmu and the appellants trying Chunarams body with a rope to a wooden log.
The High Court further inferred from the evidence of PW2 that the dead body was recovered from a place two miles away and it companyld number have been carried to such a long distance suspended to a wooden pole unless Rubi Murmu had the help of the two appellants.
On appeal by the appellants as well as Rabi Murmu and Shrimati Padmarani Murmu, the judgment of the Sessions Court was affirmed by the High Court.
Thereafter, he came back alongwith some of the neighbours and went to the police station to lodge the First Information Report.
Appeal is preferred only by kamal Murumu and Lakhiram Murmu.
