4 min readRanchiJun 26, 2026 05:00 PM IST
Nearly three decades after a Bokaro woman was allegedly murdered after being branded a witch, the Jharkhand High Court Thursday acquitted the sole convict in the case, holding that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge of murder beyond reasonable doubt as the informant, claimed to be the sole eyewitness, was unreliable.
Hearing the criminal appeal filed by the accused, Mansu Manjhi, a Division Bench of Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava set aside the December 1999 conviction and the January 2000 sentencing order.
“The prosecution has failed to prove the charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant… beyond all reasonable doubt,” the Bench said while quashing the conviction. It further held that the informant, projected as the sole eyewitness, was not reliable. “Informant’s presence at the place of occurrence is doubtful and consequently, his testimony that he had witnessed the assault on the deceased by the appellant cannot be relied upon,” the court observed.
According to the prosecution, the incident took place in September 1996 when Chandmani Manjhian went to a nearby paddy field in the morning. Her son, Rooplal Manjhi, the informant and sole eyewitness, alleged that Mansu Manjhi, armed with a tangi (axe), and another accused, Raghunath Manjhi, attacked her because they believed she was a witch.
Chandmani died on the spot from multiple head injuries. After investigation, both men were chargesheeted. During the trial, however, Raghunath Manjhi was acquitted while Mansu Manjhi was convicted under Section 302 of the IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Reassessing the evidence, the High Court found that the prosecution’s case rested almost entirely on Rooplal Manjhi’s testimony. While the informant claimed he followed his mother to the field and witnessed the assault, his wife, Basanti Devi, testified that they reached the spot only after hearing villagers raise an alarm that the deceased had already been killed.
Calling this a material contradiction, the Bench held that “the testimony of PW-12 who had been claimed as sole eyewitness is not trustworthy”. It further observed that the trial court had convicted the appellant “on wrong assumption and surmises and without properly appreciating the evidence of the sole eyewitness PW-12”.
Story continues below this ad
The Bench also found inconsistencies regarding the murder weapon. While the informant’s written statement said the deceased was attacked with an axe, he later deposed before the trial court that the appellant had assaulted her with a sword. “There is a vital contradiction in the testimony of the informant as to the weapon used in the assault. This variation is material and has substantially affected the prosecution case,” the court said.
The High Court further noted that several independent prosecution witnesses had turned hostile during the trial. It also pointed out that the investigating officer (IO) was never examined before the trial court, making it difficult for the prosecution to establish crucial aspects of the case.
Referring to settled principles of criminal jurisprudence, the High Court reiterated that a conviction can be based on the testimony of a solitary eyewitness only if such evidence is wholly reliable and inspires confidence. Since that standard was not met, the Bench extended the benefit of doubt to the appellant and set aside his conviction.
Court records show that Mansu Manjhi was released on bail after his sentence was suspended in January 2000 during the pendency of the appeal. With the appeal now allowed after nearly 26 years, the High Court discharged him from the liability of his bail bonds.