Jharkhand HC Upholds Life Term For Man Who Hammered Wife To Death And Hit Their 2-Year-Old Son With Stone

On 5 October 2015, the deceased was working on a road-construction site with her two-year-old child.

The prosecution alleged that the appellant struck the deceased on the head with a hammer and assaulted the child with a stone.

Four co-workers testified to witnessing the assaults; the deceased’s husband lodged the fardbeyan after being informed of the incident.

The trial court convicted the appellant under Sections 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), sentencing him to life imprisonment and ten years’ rigorous imprisonment respectively, with fines; the sentences were to run concurrently.

The appellant appealed, challenging, among other things, the credibility of the witnesses and his ability to use his right hand.

The Court considered the offences of murder and attempt to murder under Sections 302 and 307 IPC, respectively.

It assessed whether the prosecution evidence proved the appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt, including whether eyewitness testimony was consistent and corroborated by medical and forensic evidence.

The judgment cites no precedent or further statutory test.

The Court accepted the testimony of four eyewitnesses, who were working near the deceased and consistently described the appellant striking her with a hammer and assaulting the child with a stone; cross-examination disclosed no material basis to disbelieve them.

The post-mortem findings, including head injuries and fractures, were consistent with a hammer blow, and the doctor opined that the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.

The child’s head injury was also consistent with the account of a blow from a hard object.

The Court further noted that the appellant was apprehended at the scene, blood was found on the seized hammer and stone, and the forensic report identified human blood.

It rejected the challenge based on the appellant’s hand, noting testimony that he could perform work with that hand and the absence of medical evidence of impairment; the alleged behavioural problems did not establish a mental disorder.

It found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it, leaving the convictions and sentences under Sections 302 and 307 IPC undisturbed.