{"id":154389,"date":"2009-05-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-05-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009"},"modified":"2017-12-17T15:55:57","modified_gmt":"2017-12-17T10:25:57","slug":"gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009","title":{"rendered":"Gobind Lugun vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 May, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Gobind Lugun vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 May, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>                     CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 1504 of 2003\n                                  ----\n\n               Against the impugned judgment of conviction dated 25.08.2003 and\n        order of sentence dated 28.08.2003 respectively passed in S.T. No. 145 of\n        1999 by Shri Binod Prasad Singh, Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track\n        Court-I, Chaibasa.\n                                        ----\n        Gobind Lugun                                 ....     ....    Appellant\n                                  Versus\n        The State of Jharkhand                       ....     ....    Respondent\n                                          ....\n        For the Appellant        : Ms Indu Parashar, Advocate.\n        For the State            : Ms. Lily Sahay, A.P.P.\n                                        ....\n\n                                  PRESENT\n\n         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI\n            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR\n                                        ....\n\nBy Court: -   The appellant was charged for committing murder of his brother<\/pre>\n<p>        Laksho Lugun. By the impugned judgment, the learned court below<br \/>\n        has held him guilty for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and<br \/>\n        convicted him. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous<br \/>\n        imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2, 000\/- and in default, to<br \/>\n        undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.    The prosecution was initiated on the statement made by John<br \/>\n        Lugun on 23.10.1998 at about 1:00 p.m.<\/p>\n<p>        3.    The prosecution case, in short, is that on 08.10.1998 at about<br \/>\n        2:00 p.m. Gobind Lugun, brother of the deceased, assaulted the<br \/>\n        deceased with an axe on his shoulder and neck and the deceased<br \/>\n        sustained serious injuries. He was brought to the Rajendra Medical<br \/>\n        College Hospital (R.M.C.H.), Ranchi for his better treatment on<br \/>\n        09.10.1998. In course of treatment, he succumbed to injuries and died<br \/>\n        on 21.10.1998 in the hospital. On the basis thereof, the case was<br \/>\n        registered under Section 302 I.P.C. The Bariyatu Police sent the<br \/>\n        fardbeyan, inquest report and post-mortem report to Sonua Police<br \/>\n        Station, as the deceased was assaulted within the jurisdiction of<br \/>\n        Sonua Police Station. Sonua Police registered a formal F.I.R. under<br \/>\n        Section 302 I.P.C. against the appellant and took up investigation.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                  2             (Cr.A (DB) No. 1504 of 2003)<\/span><\/p>\n<p>4.    On completion of investigation, police submitted charge sheet<br \/>\nagainst the appellant and on that basis S.D.J.M., Porahat at Chaibasa<br \/>\ntook cognizance of the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. against the<br \/>\nappellant and committed the case to the Court of Sessions.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.    The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In<br \/>\norder to prove the said charge against the appellant, the prosecution<br \/>\naltogether examined nine witnesses:-\n<\/p>\n<p>P.W.-1, John Lugun @ Jawan Lugun-the informant and a co-villager;<br \/>\nP.W.-2, Sukwari Lugun-wife of the deceased; P.W.-3, Mangri Lugun-<br \/>\naunt of the deceased; P.W.-4, Birsa Lugun-a co-villager; P.W.-5-<br \/>\nSukhram Lugun-another co-villager (declared hostile); P.W.-6, P.W.-7<br \/>\nand P.W.-8, were co-villagers; P.W.-9 is the doctor, who conducted<br \/>\nautopsy on the dead body of the deceased Laksho Lugun. The<br \/>\nInvestigating Officer is not examined in this case.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.    P.W.-1, John Lugun, the informant, has supported the<br \/>\nprosecution case and the version made in the fardbeyan. P.W.-2,<br \/>\nSukwari Lugun, the wife of the deceased, is an eye-witness to the<br \/>\noccurrence. She has stated that while she was harvesting paddy crop<br \/>\nin the nearby field and her husband was grazing cattle, there was a<br \/>\nquarrel between the deceased and the appellant. The appellant then<br \/>\ngave an axe blow on the neck of her husband Laksho Lugun causing<br \/>\nincised cut wound on his neck.       He fell down. She raised alarm.<br \/>\nSeveral villagers who were working in nearby fields assembled. The<br \/>\naccused appellant in the meanwhile fled away towards forest. The<br \/>\nvillagers chased but they could not catch hold of him. She with the<br \/>\nhelp of co-villagers Naresh Lugun and John Lugun brought her injured<br \/>\nhusband home and thereafter they took him to R.M.C.H., Ranchi for<br \/>\ntreatment. In course of treatment in the hospital, he died after some<br \/>\ndays. P.W.-3, Mangri Lugun, a witness to the fardbeyan, has stated<br \/>\nthat on that day, on hearing the alarm raised by the deceased wife,<br \/>\nshe arrived there and saw this appellant fleeing away after assaulting<br \/>\nLaksho Lugun on his neck with an axe. P.W.-4, Birsa Lugun, has<br \/>\ndeposed that he reached the place of occurrence after hearing the<br \/>\nalarm, he saw Laksho Lugun injured and lying on the ground with<br \/>\nblood oozing out from his neck and shoulder. He saw Gobind Lagun<br \/>\nfleeing away from there. He has stated that the injured Laksho Lugun<br \/>\ntold him that his brother Govind Lugun assaulted him with an axe.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                   3              (Cr.A (DB) No. 1504 of 2003)<\/span><\/p>\n<p>P.W.-5, Sukhram Lugun, supported the occurrence but he stated that<br \/>\nthe deceased had not told him the name of the accused. He was<br \/>\ndeclared hostile. P.W.-6, Naresh Lugun, has stated that on hearing the<br \/>\nalarm raised by the wife of the deceased, he went to the place of<br \/>\noccurrence and saw Laksho Lugun injured and blood oozing out of his<br \/>\nneck. He stated that Laksho Lugun told him that his brother Govind<br \/>\nLugun assaulted him with an axe. The deceased wife Sukwari Lugun<br \/>\nalso told him that Govind Lugun had assaulted her husband. P.W.-7,<br \/>\nJiwan Lugun and P.W.-8, Soma Lugun stated that they had gone to<br \/>\nthe Laksho Lugun to see him and they were told by Sukwari Lugun<br \/>\nthat Govind Lugun assaulted his husband with an axe. They saw<br \/>\nLaksho Lugun injured with serious cut wound on neck. P.W.-9, Dr.<br \/>\nTulsi Mahto, conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of<br \/>\nthe Laksho Lugun. He has found incised wound 6 cm X 2.5 cm X 5<br \/>\ncm on the left shoulder front adjoining the root of left side neck. He<br \/>\nalso found cut injury on the left first rib and upper lobe of left lung with<br \/>\npresence of blood and blood clot in the left side of the chest cavity.<br \/>\nAccording to him, the wound on the neck was ante-mortem caused by<br \/>\nheavy sharp cutting weapon such as an axe. The death was due to<br \/>\nhemorrhage and shock.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.    Learned trial court, on appraisal of the said evidences on record,<br \/>\nhas relied on the evidence of P.W.-2 Sukwari Lugun, who is an eye-<br \/>\nwitness, the testimonies of P.W.-3, P.W.-4 and the evidence of doctor<br \/>\n(P.W.-9) and held the appellant guilty for the charge under Section<br \/>\n302 I.P.C. and convicted him as aforesaid.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.     The appellant has assailed the impugned judgment mainly on<br \/>\nthe ground that there was a delay of about 15 days in lodging the<br \/>\nF.I.R. and there was no proper explanation for the delay. The I.O. has<br \/>\nnot been examined by the prosecution which has caused serious<br \/>\nprejudice to the appellant. There are contradictions in the evidences<br \/>\nof prosecution witnesses. M\/s Indu Parashar, appearing as Amicus<br \/>\nCuriae submitted that even if the prosecution case is accepted at its<br \/>\nface value, it is clear that there was a sudden quarrel between the two<br \/>\nbrothers Gobind Lugun and Laksho Lugun in a heat of passion and the<br \/>\nappellant gave a blow of axe on the shoulder of Laksho Lugun. The<br \/>\nintention was not to kill him. There was no repetition of blow. It is not a<br \/>\ncase of murder and the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. is not<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                  4              (Cr.A (DB) No. 1504 of 2003)<\/span><\/p>\n<p>constituted. The case comes within the ambit of Exception (4) of<br \/>\nSection 300 of the I.P.C. punishable under Section 304 Part-I of the<br \/>\nI.P.C. The appellant has remained in custody for more than ten years<br \/>\nand has already suffered sufficient punishment.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.    Learned A.P.P., on the other hand, supported the impugned<br \/>\njudgment. It has been submitted that the prosecution has fully proved<br \/>\nthe fatal assault given by the appellant on the deceased. P.W.-2 &#8211; the<br \/>\neye-witness and other prosecution witnesses have supported the<br \/>\nprosecution case. The ocular testimony has been corroborated by the<br \/>\nmedical evidence of P.W.-9. Learned A.P.P., however, fairly admitted<br \/>\nthat from the facts and circumstances of the case, it does not appear<br \/>\nthat the appellant had intention to commit murder of the deceased<br \/>\nLaksho Lugun. The blow was not repeated. However, the blow was on<br \/>\nvital part which caused the death of the deceased.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.   After hearing learned Amicus Curie and learned A.P.P., we also<br \/>\nscrutinized the evidences on record. We find from the evidence of<br \/>\nP.W.-2 that she is an eye-witness and saw the appellant giving an axe<br \/>\nblow on the shoulder of the deceased. P.W.-4 Birsa Lugun, although<br \/>\narrived at the place of occurrence later on, he saw Laksho Lugun lying<br \/>\non the ground and blood oozing out of his neck and shoulder. He saw<br \/>\nGobind Lugun fleeing away from the place. Laksho Lugun told him<br \/>\nthat his brother Gobind Lugun has injured him with an axe. P.W.-6<br \/>\nalso went to the place of occurrence later on. He saw Laksho Lugun<br \/>\nin injured condition and blood oozing out from his neck. He has stated<br \/>\nthat Laksho Lugun told him that his brother Gobind Lugun had<br \/>\nassaulted him with an axe. The evidence of P.W.-2 &#8211; the eye-witness<br \/>\nand the evidence of P.W.-4 and P.W.-6, to whom the deceased had<br \/>\ntold about the assault given by his brother Gobind Lugun is relevant<br \/>\nand admissible evidence under Section 32 of the Evidence Act read<br \/>\nwith the medical evidence of P.W.-9 go to establish that the accused-<br \/>\nappellant inflicted severe axe blow on the vital part of the body of<br \/>\nLaksho Lugun near the neck which ultimately caused his death.<br \/>\nLearned court below has rightly held the appellant guilty of giving the<br \/>\nsaid blow which caused homicidal death of the deceased.                We,<br \/>\ntherefore, found no infirmity to that extent of the finding of the learned<br \/>\ncourt below.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                          5              (Cr.A (DB) No. 1504 of 2003)<\/span><\/p>\n<p>       11.      However, we find substance in the submission of learned<br \/>\n       Amicus Curie that even if the entire allegation of the prosecution is<br \/>\n       accepted at it is, it attracts Exception (4) of Section 300 I.P.C. From<br \/>\n       the evidences of the witnesses, it is manifest that there was sudden<br \/>\n       quarrel between two brothers in the field and in the heat of passion,<br \/>\n       the accused appellant gave axe blow on the shoulder of the deceased.<br \/>\n       The blow was not that grievous to cause death instantaneously. He<br \/>\n       did not repeat the blow. The deceased remained alive for about two<br \/>\n       weeks, thereafter, in course of treatment, he died on 21.10.1998. The<br \/>\n       said position is not disputed. We find that a single blow given by the<br \/>\n       appellant, on the shoulder of the deceased was not intended to take<br \/>\n       away the life of the deceased. He did not repeat blow and did not act<br \/>\n       in a cruel manner.\n<\/p>\n<p>       12.      In view of the above, though, we find the accused-appellant<br \/>\n       guilty of committing homicidal death of the deceased by giving him an<br \/>\n       axe blow on his shoulder, in our considered view it does not amount to<br \/>\n       committing murder of the deceased. The case falls within the<br \/>\n       Exception (4) of Section 300 I.P.C. and the appellant is held guilty of<br \/>\n       committing an offence punishable under Section 304 Part-I of the<br \/>\n       I.P.C.\n<\/p>\n<p>       13.      For the reasons aforesaid, we modify the conviction of the<br \/>\n       appellant and convert the same into the Section 304 Part-I of the<br \/>\n       I.P.C.\n<\/p>\n<p>       14.      We are informed that the appellant has been in custody since<br \/>\n       28.10.1998 i.e. for more than ten years, we modify the sentence of<br \/>\n       the appellant, reducing the same to the period undergone by him.\n<\/p>\n<p>       15.      In the result, this appeal is dismissed but with the said<br \/>\n       modification in the impugned judgment and in conviction and sentence<br \/>\n       of the appellant. Since, the appellant is in custody, he is directed to be<br \/>\n       set at liberty forthwith, if not wanted in any other case.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                      (Narendra Nath Tiwari, J)<\/p>\n<p>                                                          (Prashant Kumar, J.)<\/p>\n<p>Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi<br \/>\nDated 19 \/05\/2009<br \/>\nSunil\/NAFR\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jharkhand High Court Gobind Lugun vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 May, 2009 CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No. 1504 of 2003 &#8212;- Against the impugned judgment of conviction dated 25.08.2003 and order of sentence dated 28.08.2003 respectively passed in S.T. No. 145 of 1999 by Shri Binod Prasad Singh, Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Chaibasa. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-154389","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Gobind Lugun vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gobind Lugun vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-05-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-17T10:25:57+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gobind Lugun vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 May, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-17T10:25:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1877,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jharkhand High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009\",\"name\":\"Gobind Lugun vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-17T10:25:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gobind Lugun vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 May, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Gobind Lugun vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gobind Lugun vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-05-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-17T10:25:57+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gobind Lugun vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 May, 2009","datePublished":"2009-05-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-17T10:25:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009"},"wordCount":1877,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jharkhand High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009","name":"Gobind Lugun vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-05-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-17T10:25:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gobind-lugun-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-19-may-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gobind Lugun vs State Of Jharkhand on 19 May, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/154389","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=154389"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/154389\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=154389"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=154389"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=154389"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}