Headnote
AI-drafted · Editorially reviewed
These matters arise out of a Death Reference and cross criminal appeals challenging the judgment and order of conviction dated 06.09.2018 and sentence dated 26.09.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-IVth, Dumka in four Sessions Trial cases, whereby the accused-respondents were convicted for a deadly Maoist ambush on 02.07.2013 near Kathikund in which the Superintendent of Police, Pakur, Amarjit Balihar, and several police constables were killed and others grievously injured. The trial court convicted the accused under multiple provisions including Sections 148, 302/149, 302/120B/109, 396/149, 307/149, 333/149, 353/149 and 427/149 of the IPC, Section 27(2) of the Arms Act and Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, and sentenced them to death for the offences of murder and dacoity with murder.
The prosecution case was that on 02.07.2013 a police party returning with the Superintendent of Police from a DIG meeting was ambushed by 30-35 extremists near a culvert between Jamni and Amtalla. The extremists opened indiscriminate fire killing multiple police personnel including the SP and looted arms and ammunition including AK-47 rifles. A surviving constable, Bablu Murmu, disclosed that the attackers raised Maoist slogans and were identifiable by names including 'Pravil Da' and 'Tala Da', who were subsequently arrayed as accused.
The Jharkhand High Court heard the Death Reference filed by the State and the criminal appeals filed by the convicts, examining whether the death sentence and other convictions recorded by the trial court were sustainable in law and on facts, particularly considering the nature of the offence, the quality of evidence, and the principles governing confirmation of capital punishment.
Catchwords:
Maoist ambush
death sentence
murder of police officials
dacoity with murder
criminal conspiracy
unlawful assembly
arms looting
Death Reference
confirmation of capital punishment
extremist violence
Section 302 IPC
Section 396 IPC
Arms Act
Criminal Law Amendment Act
© LegalFirms.in — Headnote is proprietary. Raw judgment text is in the public domain
per Section 52(1)(p) of the Copyright Act, 1957.
Full Judgment Text
```json
{
"title": "The State Of Jharkhand vs Sukhlal @ Prabir Murmu @ Pravir Da @ Pravil Da @ Harendra Da @ Sanat Da @ Marang Da @ Amrit",
"case_number": "Death Ref. No. 04 of 2018 with Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1363 of 2018 and Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 1378 of 2018",
"side": "criminal",
"date_of_judgment": "2025-07-17",
"bench": "Rongon Mukhopadhyay, Sanjay Prasad",
"reportable": false,
"parties_petitioner": "The State of Jharkhand",
"parties_respondent": "Sukhlal @ Prabir Murmu @ Pravir Da @ Pravil Da @ Harendra Da @ Sanat Da @ Marang Da @ Amrit and Sanatan Baski @ Tala Da",
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools.
For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
From ₹167/month.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.
