BATUA @ BHASKAR PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant assails in this appeal the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar in S.T. Case No. 2/127 of 1993. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, in the impugned judgment while acquitting the Appellant of the charge Under Sections 302/34 I.P.C., held him guilty of the charge Under Section 304 -I, I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for ten years.

(2.) THE prosecution case is that on 25.9.1991 at about noon time while Abanikanta Mohanty (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased") was going towards Khurda Railway Station, on his way near the Sitaram Chhaka of Jatni, the Appellant along with on Ashok Behera (since acquitted) accosted him and then quarreled with him and in course of such quarrel, Ashok caught hold the shirt of the deceased and the Appellant dealt a stab blow by means of a Gupti on the left side of his upper abdomen, as a result of which the deceased sustained severe bleeding injury, fell down there and became unconscious. The Appellant then along with Ashok fled away with their weapon of offence. The deceased thereafter was shifted by the witnesses present namely, Pramod Barik (P.W.4) and Trailokya Mohan @ Bulu Das (P.W.5) to the South Eastern Railway Hospital, Jatni in a Tempo and the doctor present there seeing the condition of the deceased to be critical, referred the deceased to S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack for better management and also sent medico logical intimation (Ext.5) to Jatni P.S. On receipt of the said intimation, Jatni P.S. Case No. 142 of 1991 was registered by the S.I. of Police, Jatni P.S. and the investigation was taken up by S.I. of Police, Sri Banka Bihari Murmu. In the meanwhile, as the deceased succumbed to the injuries sustained while undergoing treatment in S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack, the case was turned to one Under Sections 302/34 I.P.C. Subsequently on completion of investigation, charge sheet was placed against the Appellant and his co -accused Ashok Behera alleging commission of offence Under Section 302/ 34 I.P.C. and during the time of investigation, it also came to light that the crime was committed by the accused being actuated by previous animosity.

(3.) IN transpires from the evidence of P.W.9, Dr. Suchitra Das, who conducted the autopsy that the death of the deceased was occurred on account of injuries sustained by him on his persons. In the cross -examination, the Appellant has not disputed the same. The evidence of doctor in this regard is corroborated by the post mortem report, Ext, 3 prepared by him. Considering the nature and situs of the injuries, the possibility of the same is ruled out to be suicidal and accidental. As such, the only inference, that can be drawn that the injuries caused were homicidal. The trial Court relying on such evidence appears to have rendered a finding that the death of the deceased was homicidal in nature. For the aforesaid reason, to this Court also, the finding of the Court below that the death of the deceased was homicidal one appears to be based on evidence on record and as such does not deserve to be disturbed. Hence, the first and foremost ingredient of the charge Under Section 304 -I, I.P.C. that the death of the deceased must be homicidal one, has been established in this case.