TEJU SINGH Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by the present accused appellant against the judgment and order dtd. 28/1/2014 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Rourkela in Sessions Trial No.128/75/5 of 2012-13 whereby the accused who stood charged under Ss. 457/307/302 of the Indian Penal Code has been convicted for the offence under Ss. 452/307/302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment.

(2.) The concise facts of the case as set out by the prosecution is that on the night/early morning of 2/10/2011 at around 12:10 A.M. while the sister of the informant was asleep with her mother, the accused trespassed into their house by scaling the wall and attacked their mother by means of a sharp knife on her lower abdomen and chest. The sister of the informant woke up to find the accused dealing blows to her mother. She tried to save her mother and in the process she sustained injury on her hand. The accused thereafter fled away from the spot. The informant lodged a written report before the IIC, Bondamunda Police Station who registered P.S. Case No.65 dtd. 2/10/2011 u/s. 452, 307 of the Indian Penal Code and investigation was taken up. The injured persons were sent for their medical examination, the I.O. visited the spot, examined the witnesses as well as the informant. During currency of the investigation, the mother of the informant died and a case was made out u/s.302 of IPC. The I.O. seized the weapon of offence, apparels etc. and issued a requisition for conducting Post Mortem Examination over the dead body of the deceased. The accused was arrested and after completion of investigation, the I.O. submitted the charge-sheet u/s.452, 307,302 of IPC vide charge-sheet No.39 dtd. 24/7/2012 against the accused. The trial was thereafter conducted by the learned SDJM, Panposh.

(3.) The trial court thereafter framed 3 issues. The prosecution has examined as many as 11 witnesses and no witnesses were produced from the defense side. Documents were admitted into evidence on behalf of the prosecution alone. P.W.1 and P.W.2 are the daughters of the deceased. P.W.2 is the informant. P.W.3 is a co-villager. P.W.4 is the Medical Officer who conducted the autopsy. P.W.5 is a post occurrence witness in whose presence the accused reportedly admitted his guilt. P.W.6 is the Medical Officer who had examined P.W.1, the daughter of the deceased and the younger sister of the informant. P.W.7 was the ASI of police who initially investigated into the case. P.W.8 is a post occurrence witness to whom the informant had informed that her mother sustained knife injury inflicted by the accused and who had given ?200 for the medical aid. In his presence inquest was also conducted. P.W.9 who is the front door neighbor of the informant is a post occurrence witness. P.W.10 is the I.O. who took over charge of investigation from P.W.7 after the case was registered u/s.302 of IPC. P.W.11 is a co-villager of the informant and the accused.