{"id":50132,"date":"2008-10-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008"},"modified":"2018-01-17T13:26:59","modified_gmt":"2018-01-17T07:56:59","slug":"mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"Mathai Marandi & Ors. vs State on 23 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n
Mathai Marandi & Ors. vs State on 23 October, 2008<\/div>\n
                   Criminal Appeal No. 336 of 1990 P\n                                    With\n                   Criminal Appeal No. 494 of 1990 P\n     Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26th July\n     1990 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Santhal Paragana at\n     Dumka in Sessions Trial No. 323 of 1984.\n\n     1. Mathai Marandi\n     2. Nandlal marandi\n     3. Suniram Marandi.....................Appellants                (In Cr. Appl. No. 336\/1990 P)\n\n     4. Mangal Marandi................               Appellant   (In Cr. Appl. No. 494 of 1990 P)\n\n                               Versus\n     The State of Bihar (now Jharkhand).........Respondent                (In both the appeals)\n\n                                        ......\n     For the Appellants             : Mr. Lakhan Chandra Roy, Advocate.\n     For the State                  : Mr. A.P.P.\n                                       ......\n                                  PRESENT\n               The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amareshwar Sahay\n               The Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Jaya Roy\n\n                                JUDGMENT\n     C.A.V. on 22\/09\/2008                          Delivered on 23 \/10\/2008\n\nJaya Roy, J.        Since both the aforesaid appeals arise out of a common\n\n     judgment, as such they were heard together and are being disposed of\n\n     by this common judgment. These two appeals have been preferred\n\n     against the judgment dated 26th July 1990 passed in S.T. No. 323 of\n\n     1984 by Shri Jugal Kishore Prasad, 2nd Additional Sessions Judge,\n\n     Santhal Paragana at Dumka whereby the sole appellant Mangal\n\n     Marandi in Criminal Appeal No. 494\/1990 (P) has been convicted for\n\n     the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to\n\n     undergo imprisonment for life, whereas the other three appellants of\n\n     Criminal Appeal No. 336 of 1990 (P) namely, Mathai Marandi, Nandlal\n\n     Marandi and Suni Ram Marandi have been convicted for the offence\n\n     under Section 302\/34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for life.\n\n     The trial court has further convicted Suni Ram Marandi and Nandlal\n\n     Marandi under Section 323 IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for\n                                               Cr.Appeal No. 336 of 1990 P with 494\/1990 P\n                                [2]\n\nthree months and both the sentences imposed upon them have been\n\ndirected to run concurrently.\n\n2.          Since, no one appeared to press these appeals on behalf of\n\nthe appellants and, therefore, we appointed Mr. Sagarmoy Banerjee,\n\nAdvocate as Amicus Curiae to assist this Court on behalf of the\n\nappellants in both the appeals.\n\n3.          The brief facts, leading to these appeals are that on\n\n28\/06\/1982<\/pre>\n
 at about 7.00 P.M. all the four appellants named above<\/p>\n
were fencing their maize field situated contiguous west to the house of<\/p>\n
Lakhan Besra (deceased), whereupon Lakhan Besra and his two sons,<\/p>\n
Sandhu Besra and Dhiba Besra protested, which led to altercation<\/p>\n
between them. In the meantime, accused Mangal Marandi assaulted<\/p>\n
Lakhan Besra with Katari causing bleeding injuries on his head and<\/p>\n
other three above named appellants also assaulted him with Lathi.<\/p>\n
They also assaulted Sadhu and Dhiba with Lathi. Family members of<\/p>\n
Lakhan Besra brought him to his house where he died soon after the<\/p>\n
said alleged occurrence.\n<\/p>\n
            It is further stated in the Fardbeyan that there exists a<\/p>\n
maize field, measuring about ten Kathas situated contiguous west, i.e.<\/p>\n
back side of the house of Lakhan besra. This plot was acquired by<\/p>\n
Lakhan Besra from the maternal grandfather of accused Mangal<\/p>\n
Marandi in exchange of his own land about twelve years before the date<\/p>\n
of the occurrence. But there was some court-case pending between<\/p>\n
them. Lakhan Besra was in possession of the said lands from before<\/p>\n
the alleged occurrence.\n<\/p>\n
4.          Chotu   Besra,      nephew   of     Lakhan          Besra        lodged         the<\/p>\n
Fardbeyan (Ext. 3) at Masanjore out-post on 29\/06\/1982 at 8.00 A.M.<\/p>\n
and on the basis of the said Fardbeyan the formal FIR (Ext. 4) was<\/p>\n
drawn up. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against all<\/p>\n
the four appellants and they were put on trial after framing charge<\/p>\n
against them under Section 302\/34 IPC for causing the murder of
\n                                            Cr.Appeal No. 336 of 1990 P with 494\/1990 P
\n                               [3]<\/p>\n
Lakhan Besra and further for the offence under Section 323 IPC for<\/p>\n
voluntarily causing hurt to Sadhu Besra and Dhiba Besra.<\/p>\n
5.          The appellants pleaded false implication and not guilty and<\/p>\n
claimed to be tried.\n<\/p>\n
6.          The prosecution has examined 12 witnesses amongst them<\/p>\n
PW-9 and PW-10 are Chowkidars, who had carried the corpse of Lkhan<\/p>\n
Besra to Sadar Hospital, Dumka on 29\/06\/1982 for Post Mortem. PW-<\/p>\n
1 is the informant but he is not an eyewitness of the said occurrence.<\/p>\n
PW-2 Chatur Baski is the son-in-law of Lakhan Besra. He claimed to<\/p>\n
have rushed to P.O. on hulla and had seen the said occurrence. PW-3<\/p>\n
Dhiba Besra is the son of the deceased who had sustained injury by<\/p>\n
Lathi given by Suniram and Nandlal but he was declared hostile. PW-4<\/p>\n
Maku Tudu is the wife of Sadhu Besra, she claimed to have seen the<\/p>\n
said occurrence. PW-5 Sadhu Besra is another son of the deceased who<\/p>\n
also sustained injuries. PW-6 Turi Besra is the daughter of the<\/p>\n
deceased who has claimed to have seen the said occurrence. PW-7<\/p>\n
Ravan Besra also claimed to have gone at P.O. on hulla and saw the<\/p>\n
appellant Mangal Marandi armed with sondha (Katari) and the<\/p>\n
remaining three appellants armed with lathi, fleeing away from the<\/p>\n
place of occurrence. PW-8 is the Doctor, who did the post mortem. PW-<\/p>\n
11 is the Doctor, who examined Sadhu Besra and he proved the injury<\/p>\n
report (Ext.2). PW-12 is the Investigating Officer of this case.<\/p>\n
7.          Challenging the conviction and sentence passed by the trial<\/p>\n
court against the appellants, Mr. Banerjee, learned Amicus Curiae<\/p>\n
appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that the trial court has<\/p>\n
wrongly convicted the appellants on the testimony of the interested<\/p>\n
witnesses, who were on inimical terms. He further submitted that there<\/p>\n
are vital contradictions in the evidences of the prosecution witnesses<\/p>\n
and, therefore, their evidences were liable to be rejected. He further<\/p>\n
submitted that there is no evidence to the effect that prior to the alleged<\/p>\n
occurrence there was any meeting of minds and, therefore, the
\n                                             Cr.Appeal No. 336 of 1990 P with 494\/1990 P
\n                             [4]<\/p>\n
appellants could not have been convicted for the offence under Section<\/p>\n
34 IPC.\n<\/p>\n
8.          We have considered the submissions made on behalf of the<\/p>\n
appellants alongwith oral and documentary evidence. PW-8 Dr. Sultan<\/p>\n
Ahmad did the post mortem examination on the dead body of Lakhan<\/p>\n
Besra and found following ante-mortem injuries:-<\/p>\n
            (i) One incised wound 4″x3xbone deep over left periatal<\/p>\n
            region. On dissection of the scalp it was found that brain<\/p>\n
            and membrane was lacerated and haemotoma was found<\/p>\n
            present under the fractured area.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            (ii) Incised wound 3″x1\/2″ x bone deep over the occipital<\/p>\n
            region.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            (iii) Swelling with eccymosis over left side of face 6″x1″ and<\/p>\n
            over back of the waist 5″x3″.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            (iv) Incised wound 1″x \u00bd x muscle deep over left elbow.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            Injury nos. (i), (ii) and (iv) above were caused by some<\/p>\n
sharp cutting weapon such as Katari whereas injury no. (iii) was<\/p>\n
caused by hard and blunt substances like lathi.<\/p>\n
            In his opinion, death was due to shock and hemorrhage<\/p>\n
caused by injuries nos. (i) and (ii) above which were sufficient enough<\/p>\n
in ordinary course of nature to cause death.\n<\/p>\n
            Thus, from the evidence of the post mortem report, it is<\/p>\n
clear that death of Lakhan Besra was homicidal in nature.<\/p>\n
9.          On careful scrutiny of the evidence it appears that PW2,<\/p>\n
Chatur Baski, has stated in his evidence that he rushed to the place of<\/p>\n
occurrence on hulla and saw accused Mangal Marandi assaulting<\/p>\n
Lakhan Besra    thrice with katari and rest three accused are said to<\/p>\n
have assaulted with lathi. P.W.4, Maku Tudu , wife of Sadhu Besra<\/p>\n
has also narrated about the prosecution case in detail. She claims to<\/p>\n
have seen the accused ,Mangal Marandi assaulting Lakhan Besra by<\/p>\n
katari and the rest three accused persons by lathi . She has further
\n                                          Cr.Appeal No. 336 of 1990 P with 494\/1990 P
\n                             [5]<\/p>\n
stated   that she, with the help of Turi Besra, PW6, brought Lakhan<\/p>\n
Besra to his house. P.W.6, Turi Besra has also corroborated the same<\/p>\n
in her evidence . P.W5, Sadhu Besra who himself is an injured witness ,<\/p>\n
has also stated that Mangal Marandi assaulted Lakhan Besra by katari<\/p>\n
and the other three accused persons also assaulted him by lathi. The<\/p>\n
other three accused persons also assaulted Sadhu and others by lalthi.<\/p>\n
            Thus from the evidence of the eyewitnesses PWs- 2, 4, 5<\/p>\n
and 6 and corroborative evidence of PW-7, who saw the assailants<\/p>\n
fleeing away from the P.O. with weapons in their hands, it has been<\/p>\n
established that the appellant Mangal Marandi intentionally assaulted<\/p>\n
Lakhan Besra (deceased) with a dangerous weapon like ‘Katari’ on his<\/p>\n
head, the most vital part of his body, causing injury on his brain<\/p>\n
resulting into his almost instantaneous death. From the aforesaid<\/p>\n
evidence of the eyewitnesses, it is also established that remaining three<\/p>\n
appellants had also actively participated in assaulting Lakhan Besra<\/p>\n
having common intention to kill him. It has also come in the evidence<\/p>\n
that two appellants namely, Suni Ram Marandi and Nandlal Marandi<\/p>\n
voluntarily caused hurt to Sadhu besra and Dibha Besra at the<\/p>\n
relevant time. No doubt that there are some contradictions in the<\/p>\n
evidence of the prosecution witnesses regarding the number of blows<\/p>\n
given by the appellants but at the same time it has to be borne in mind<\/p>\n
that when any murderous assault is taking place then at that time it is<\/p>\n
not possible for anyone to count the number of blows hurled by each<\/p>\n
assailants. Therefore, any such contradiction as pointed out by the<\/p>\n
learned counsel does not affect the prosecution case in any manner.<\/p>\n
10.         Mr. Banerjee further argued that there was a counter case<\/p>\n
lodged by the appellants against the informant party.<\/p>\n
            In this regard we find that PW-12 the Investigating Officer<\/p>\n
has stated in his evidence that he did not find any injury on the person<\/p>\n
of any of the accused. He further stated that he had submitted final
\n                                           Cr.Appeal No. 336 of 1990 P with 494\/1990 P
\n                              [6]<\/p>\n
report in the said counter case. In this view of the matter, this point<\/p>\n
has also no legs to stand.\n<\/p>\n
11.         Lastly, Mr. Banerjee submitted that the appellant namely,<\/p>\n
Mathai Marandi and Nandlal Marandi were aged about 12 years only<\/p>\n
on the date of the alleged occurrence, i.e. on 28\/06\/1982 and,<\/p>\n
therefore, they are entitled the benefit of the provisions of the Act then<\/p>\n
in force, i.e. Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. We find force in the argument<\/p>\n
of the learned counsel in this regard. From the records of this case, it<\/p>\n
appears that on 14\/03\/1990 the trial court has recorded the age of<\/p>\n
Mathai marandi and Nandlal Marandi to be 20 years in the statement<\/p>\n
recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and in the impugned judgment<\/p>\n
dated 26\/07\/1990 as 20 years. Thus, there is no doubt that in the year<\/p>\n
1982 they were not more than 12\/13 years of age and, therefore, were<\/p>\n
Juvenile as defined under the Juvenile Justice Act 1986. Accordingly,<\/p>\n
they are held to be entitled to the benefits of the provisions of Juvenile<\/p>\n
Justice Act, 1986 the law which was in force at that time, in view of the<\/p>\n
law laid down by the Supreme Court. Reference be made to the cases of<\/p>\n
“Upendra Kumar- versus -State of Bihar, reported in (2005) 3 SCC 592,<\/p>\n
“Bhola Bhagat-versus- State of Bihar, reported in (1997) 8 SCC 720,<\/p>\n
“Gopinath Ghosh-versus- State of W.B.., reported in (1984) Supp. SCC<\/p>\n
228 and in the case of “Pradeep Kumar- versus- State of U.P., reported in<\/p>\n
(1995) Supp. 4 SCC 419.”\n<\/p>\n
12.         In view of the decisions and findings above, we are of the<\/p>\n
view that the trial court has rightly held that the prosecution witnesses<\/p>\n
have proved the charges against the appellants beyond all reasonable<\/p>\n
doubts. Consequently, the conviction and sentence passed by the trial<\/p>\n
court against the appellant Mangal Marandi in Cr. Appeal No.<\/p>\n
494\/1990 P, and against appellant, Suniram Marandi, are                          hereby<\/p>\n
affirmed and their appeal is dismissed. Since they are on bail, their<\/p>\n
bail bonds are cancelled and they are directed to surrender before the
\n                                            Cr.Appeal No. 336 of 1990 P with 494\/1990 P
\n                                [7]<\/p>\n
court below to serve out the remaining period of sentence. The trial<\/p>\n
court is also directed to take all effective steps to secure the attendance<\/p>\n
of these appellants to serve out the remaining part of sentence in<\/p>\n
accordance with law. So far as the appellants Mathai Marandi and<\/p>\n
Nandlal Marandi are concerned, their conviction as passed by the trial<\/p>\n
court is also confirmed but since they have been found to be Juvenile<\/p>\n
on the date of alleged occurrence, they are given the benefit of the<\/p>\n
provisions of Juvenile Justice Act 1986 which was in force at the<\/p>\n
relevant time and consequently, their sentence as awarded by the trial<\/p>\n
court are hereby quashed. With the above modification in sentence<\/p>\n
their appeals are dismissed. The two appellants namely, Mathai<\/p>\n
Marandi and Nandlal Marandi are on bail. They are discharged from<\/p>\n
the liability of their bail bonds.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                                              (Jaya Roy, J)<\/p>\n
Amareshwar Sahay, J.\n<\/p>\n
                                                    (Amareshwar Sahay, J)<\/p>\n
Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi
\nDated the 23rd October 2008
\nNAFR\/Mukund-BS\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court Mathai Marandi & Ors. vs State on 23 October, 2008 Criminal Appeal No. 336 of 1990 P With Criminal Appeal No. 494 of 1990 P Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26th July 1990 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Santhal Paragana at Dumka in Sessions Trial […]<\/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-50132","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMathai Marandi & Ors. vs State on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mathai Marandi & Ors. vs State on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-17T07:56:59+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\\\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mathai Marandi & Ors. vs State on 23 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-17T07:56:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1757,\"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\\\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\",\"name\":\"Mathai Marandi & Ors. vs State on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-17T07:56:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mathai Marandi & Ors. vs State on 23 October, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Mathai Marandi & Ors. vs State on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mathai Marandi & Ors. vs State on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-17T07:56:59+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\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mathai Marandi & Ors. vs State on 23 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-17T07:56:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008"},"wordCount":1757,"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\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008","name":"Mathai Marandi & Ors. vs State on 23 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-17T07:56:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mathai-marandi-ors-vs-state-on-23-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mathai Marandi & Ors. vs State on 23 October, 2008"}]},{"@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\/50132","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=50132"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50132\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=50132"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=50132"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=50132"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}