Case No. 11 of 1996
Sikkim High Court
Bench: Hon’ble Ripusudan Dayal C.J.
Date of judgment: 29th June 2002
Relevant Acts/Sections:
- Section 342 of IPC (Punishment for wrongful confinement.)
- Section 34 of IPC (Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.)
- Section 304 of IPC (Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder.)
- Section 193 of IPC (Punishment for false evidence.)
- Section 179 of CrPC (When an act is an offense because of anything which has been done and of a consequence which has ensued, the offense may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction such thing has been done or such consequence has ensued.)
Backstory
In this case, the deceased Bimal Tamang was a resident of Gyalzing where he resided with his mother Doma Tamang P.W. 7 and younger brother Bal Bahadur Tamang P.W. 8. Some times, he used to go to Darap and when he did so, he used to live in the house of his uncle, PassangTesering. His father Chaturay Tamang along with his stepmother Menuka Tamang also resided at Darap. On 7-12-1993, the deceased was at Darap and he came to Gyalzing by Tata Truck bearing No. SK-03/0111 in the night on or after 9 pm.
Thereafter, the appellants wrongly confined him at the Gyalzing Police Station and caused injuries to him during the night. They released him in the morning the next day i.e. 8-12-1993 at about 6 a.m. Thereafter, he went to his house at Gyalzing. He was admitted to the Gyalzing Hospital in the afternoon near about 4 p.m. He died during the night of 8th and 9th.Dec.1993 at about 0030 hrs at the Hospital.
FIR was registered on 11-12-1993 at 1730 hrs on the report, of the District Magistrate, West Sikkim to the effect that information has been received from the Superintendent of Police dated 8-12-1993 regarding the death of the deceased in Gyalzing Hospital in the night of 8th Dec. 1993 under suspicious circumstances and the preliminary report of the inquest revealed that there was a prima facie case of wrongful confinement and culpable homicide not amounting to murder against the appellants. The complainant, as District Magistrate of West, taking cognizance of the case under Section 324/304, IPC directed the office-in-charge, Gyalizing Police Station Gyalzing to register a case against the appellants and to take up further investigation.
Postmortem Findings
An autopsy on his body was conducted on 10-12-1993 by Dr. S.D. Sharma who was the Medico-Legal Consultant at the S.T.N.M. Hospital, Gangtok on being called to the District Hospital, Gyalzing, vide his report Autopsy started at 1300 hrs and concluded at 1425 hrs.
It was detected that the internal injuries of extra vacation of the blood in the scalp in an area of 3 x 2 cm over the parietal region and subarachnoid, hematoma over the brain and the right temporoparietal region. There was edema of the brain also. In his opinion cause of death was coma as a result of intra nial hemorrhage following a blunt injury to the head. The injuries detected were more than 28 to 48 hours old before death. In the cross-examination, he admitted the suggestion that the injuries had been caused on the body of the deceased three to five days before he conducted the autopsy.
He also admitted that there was no visible external injury on the scalp in the area where extraversion of blood was detected on the opening of the scalp. He also admitted in the cross-examination that intracranial hemorrhage could be caused by falls also. However, in the reexamination, he stated that all the injuries both external and internal found on the body of the deceased could not be produced by a single fall. He also stated that a single fall couldn’t produce hemorrhage intracranially without fracture of the skull bone
Judgment
The appeals were allowed, the impugned judgment and order of the learned trial Court were set aside and all the appellants are acquitted of the offenses under Sections 342 and 304, Part II read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Notices were issued to Gunjaman Rai, Harka Bahadur Thami and Som Bahadur Subba, to show cause by 5th August 2002 why they should not be prosecuted under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code for giving false evidence.