CourtVerdict – Jharkhand High Court Overturns Life Sentence in Three-Decade-Old Murder Case
CourtVerdict – A major legal development has emerged from the Jharkhand High Court, where a man convicted in a decades-old murder case linked to allegations of witchcraft has been cleared of all charges. The court concluded that the prosecution failed to present convincing and reliable evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the cancellation of both the conviction and the life imprisonment awarded by the trial court.
High Court Reviews Long-Pending Criminal Appeal
The decision was delivered by a Division Bench comprising Justice S.N. Prasad and Justice P.K. Srivastava. The Bench allowed the appeal filed by Mansu Manjhi, also known as Mansa Manjhi, and set aside the judgment passed by a Bokaro trial court nearly 26 years ago. The lower court had sentenced him to life imprisonment in January 2000 after holding him guilty in connection with the 1996 killing of Chandmani Manjhian.
The High Court, however, found that the evidence presented during the trial did not satisfy the legal standard required for sustaining a criminal conviction.
Questions Raised Over Witness Testimony
According to the prosecution, Chandmani Manjhian was attacked with a sharp-edged weapon in September 1996 after she was allegedly accused of practicing witchcraft. The complaint claimed that Mansu Manjhi carried out the assault while another individual assisted him. That co-accused had already been acquitted during the original trial proceedings.
While reviewing the appeal, the High Court closely examined the statements of witnesses and noted serious inconsistencies. The prosecution’s case mainly depended on the testimony of the victim’s son, who claimed to have witnessed the incident. However, the judges observed that his version differed significantly from the statement given by his wife regarding how they reached the location and whether he had actually seen the attack take place.
The Bench also found contradictions relating to the alleged weapon used in the crime, reducing the credibility of the prosecution’s version.
Investigation Found to Have Significant Gaps
The court further noted that several prosecution witnesses did not support the case during the trial and were declared hostile. Another important factor considered by the judges was the absence of testimony from the investigating officer, whose examination could have helped establish key facts related to the crime scene and investigation.
These shortcomings, the Bench observed, weakened the prosecution’s case and created serious doubts about the sequence of events presented before the trial court.
Benefit of Doubt Extended to the Appellant
After evaluating the available evidence, the High Court concluded that the prosecution had not proved the charge of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the judges quashed the conviction dated December 20, 1999, along with the sentencing order issued on January 5, 2000, by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Bokaro.
The court also ordered that the appellant be released from his bail obligations, noting that the sentence had remained suspended while the appeal was pending before the High Court.
Court Reaffirms Principle on Sole Eyewitness Evidence
While delivering the judgment, the Bench reiterated a well-established legal principle that a conviction can legally rest on the testimony of a single eyewitness, provided the evidence is entirely reliable and inspires confidence. In the present case, the court held that the testimony failed to meet that standard because of material contradictions and inconsistencies.
Finding that the prosecution had not discharged its burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the High Court allowed the appeal and acquitted Mansu Manjhi, bringing an end to a criminal case that had remained under judicial scrutiny for nearly three decades.