Jharkhand HC Upholds Life Sentences For 3 Men Convicted Of Killing Couple After Accusing Their Son And Daughter-In-Law Of Witchcraft

The appellants were prosecuted for entering the informant’s house, assaulting and killing his parents, setting fire to the house and harvested crops, and threatening the family, allegedly in connection with accusations of witchcraft against the informant’s brother and his wife.

The trial court convicted them under Sections 452/34, 302/34, 201/34, 436/34 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act, 1999, imposing concurrent sentences including life imprisonment for murder.

The prosecution’s principal witnesses were the informant (PW9) and his son (PW12); several other witnesses were declared hostile.

The appellants challenged the convictions, including on the grounds that the principal witnesses were related and that their evidence was unreliable.

The court considered the charged offences under Sections 452, 302, 201, 436 and 506, read with Section 34 of the IPC, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act, 1999.

It applied the principle that a witness is not “interested” merely because they are related to the victim; relationship alone does not justify rejecting testimony. The court must assess whether the evidence is reliable, probable, cogent and consistent, while exercising caution rather than suspicion (Laltu Ghosh v. State of W.B., (2019) 15 SCC 344).

It also relied on Ramji Singh v. State of U.P., (2020) 2 SCC 425, for the principle that testimony cannot be discarded solely because witnesses are interested.

The court found PW9 and PW12 to be natural witnesses whose accounts implicated all three appellants in the assault and arson, and considered their evidence consistent on the material aspects of the occurrence.

It treated the discrepancies as minor and not destructive of the prosecution case, and noted that the medical evidence established fatal injuries caused by a heavy, hard, sharp-cutting object.

The court also relied on the investigating officer’s evidence that a tangi seized from one appellant’s house had been sent for forensic examination and that the FSL report matched it with the deceased Lohra Singh’s blood.

Applying the principles on related witnesses, it rejected the contention that PW9 and PW12 should be disbelieved because of their relationship to the deceased.

Both appeals were dismissed; any pending interlocutory applications were disposed of, and copies of the judgment were directed to be furnished to the appellants and sent to the trial court.