KISHORE BHOI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this revision, petitioner has assailed legality of the judgment dated 1.7.2002 passed by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge,Puri in Criminal Appeal No.17/20 of 1999/1998 confirming the judgment dated 29.10.1998 passed by the learned Asst. Sessions Judge -cum -C.J.M.,Puri in S.T. Case No.54/234 of 1997, by which the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years and also to pay of Rs.5000/ -, in default, to undergo R.I. for six months, under Section 436 of the I.P.C.

(2.) INFORMANT (P.W.2) has three sons namely, Rabi, Kishore (petitioner) and Surendra(P.W.3). P.W.1 Mani Bhoi is P.W.3s wife whereas P.W.6 Chandala Dei is Rabis wife. Prosecution case is that there was partition of the lands and dwelling house amongst the three brothers. However, as the petitioner tried to dispose of his share of dwelling house, there was dispute between him and his brothers. Occurrence took place at about 3.30 P.M. on 17.7.1996. When P.W.3 was absent from his house, petitioner demanded P.W.2 to handover documents relating to the house. When she refused, petitioner abused her in obscene language and gave fist and kick blows. On protest being raised by P.W.2, petitioner got furious and set fire to P.W.3s dwelling house. In spite of attempts made by informant and co -villagers to extinguish fire, two rooms were completely burnt. On the basis of written report submitted at Kumbharpara P.S., F.I.R. Ext. 3 was registered. In course of investigation, I.O. P.W.7 examined witnesses and effected seizure of documents and other articles. On completion of investigation charge -sheet was submitted against the petitioner for commission of offences under sections 436 and 323 of the I.P.C

(3.) IN order to substantiate the allegations the prosecution examined 7 witnesses and placed reliance on documents marked Exts. 1 to 5. P.Ws. 4 and 5 are witnesses to seizure of document under seizure list Ext.1. No evidence, oral or documentary, was adduced from the side of the defence. Placing reliance on the testimonies of P.Ws. 1 and 2 trial court convicted and sentenced the petitioner for commission of offence under section 436 of the I.P.C. which has been upheld by the appellate court.