NAGESH KHILLO Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.10.2001 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jeypore in Sessions Case No.68 of 1998. The appellant who stood charged for commission of offences under Sections 302/307/324/436 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the I.P.C.') was found guilty of offences under Sections 324/436 of the I.P.C. for voluntarily causing hurt to his co -villagers, namely, Madhaba Garam, Monima Khillo, Dohana Khillo, Shyamo Khillo, Sukra Garam and Kumudan Garam, and for setting fire to the dwelling houses of the villagers. He was also found guilty under Sections 302 of the I.P.C. for committing murder of deceased Sellu Garam. Learned Additional Sessions Judge sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life for conviction under Section 302 of the I.P.C. and also imposed fine of Rs.1000/ -. For conviction under Section 436 of the I.P.C. the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.1000/ -. For conviction under Section 324 of the I.P.C., no sentence has been imposed. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that in the night of 27/28 of March, 1998 there was a quarrel between the appellant and his wife. The appellant for the above reason set fire to his own house by means of a burning fire wood. His wife ran away to the house of Ram Chandra Garam P.W.3. The appellant, therefore, set fire to the house of P.W.3. Then a pandemonium broke out in the village. The appellant suddenly thereafter assaulted the villagers by means of the said burning fire wood and also set fire to other houses in the village. The appellant also set fire to the houses of P.Ws.1 and 2 and assaulted the deceased, who happens to be the mother of P.W.1 and wife of P.W.2, by means of an axe he was holding. Because of such conduct of the appellant, entire village was destroyed due to fire and the deceased who was assaulted by means of an axe succumbed to the injuries. P.W.1 lodged a report before the Officer -In -Charge of Boipariguda P.S. and a case was registered. On completion of investigation, charge -sheet was submitted against the appellant for commission of offences under Sections 302/307/324/436 of the I.P.C.

(3.) THE prosecution examined as many as eighteen witnesses to establish the charges. Out of eighteen witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution, P.W.1 is the son of the deceased and is also the informant. P.W.2 is the husband of the deceased. P.Ws.3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14 and 15 are witnesses to setting fire to different houses as well as assault on some of them. P.Ws.11 and 18 examined some of the injured witnesses. P.W.16 also examined some of the injured witnesses and conducted postmortem examination. P.W.17 is the I.O. in the case.