Man acquitted in 30-year-old murder case

PNS

Ranchi

The Jharkhand High Court has overturned the murder conviction of a man who was found guilty nearly three decades ago, observing that the prosecution failed to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt due to inconsistent witness accounts and gaps in the investigation.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava allowed the appeal of Mansu Manjhi, also known as Mansa Manjhi, setting aside the life imprisonment awarded to him by a Bokaro trial court in 2000 in connection with the 1996 killing of Chandmani Manjhian.

As per the prosecution, Chandmani was allegedly murdered in September 1996 after being accused of practising witchcraft. The FIR stated that Manjhi attacked the victim with a sharp-edged weapon while another person allegedly assisted him. However, the co-accused had already been acquitted during the trial.

While examining the appeal, the High Court noted that the prosecution’s case was primarily based on the evidence of the victim’s son, who claimed to have witnessed the incident. The Bench found major inconsistencies between his version and that of his wife, particularly regarding their arrival at the scene and whether he had actually seen the assault. The court also highlighted conflicting statements concerning the weapon allegedly used in the crime.

The judges further observed that several prosecution witnesses had turned hostile during the trial. They also noted that the investigating officer was never examined, leaving important aspects, including the place of occurrence, inadequately proved.

Concluding that the evidence fell short of the legal standard required for a criminal conviction, the High Court granted the appellant the benefit of doubt, quashed his conviction and life sentence, and allowed the appeal.

The Bench reiterated that although the testimony of a lone eyewitness can form the basis of conviction, such evidence must be credible, consistent and inspire confidence. Since the sole eyewitness’s testimony failed to meet that test, the court ruled in favour of the appellant.

As Manjhi had remained on suspended sentence during the pendency of the appeal, the court also discharged him from the liabilities of his bail bonds.