DEV DIRDA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant, by filing this Appeal from inside the jail, has called in question the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 3rd May, 2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malkangiri in Criminal Trial No.24 of 2007. The Appellant as the sole accused having faced the Trial for commission of the offence under section 302 of the IPC, has been found guilty of the offence under section 304-II of the IPC and accordingly, he has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years with usual benefit of set off as provided under section 428 of the Cr.P.C.

(2.) The prosecution case, in short, is that on 28th day of November, 2006 during morning hours, Nanga Madhi (the deceased) and the accused had been to Malkangiri to sell fire-wood and Anda Madhi who has been examined in P.W.1 in the trial, had accompanied them. In the afternoon, on their way back home from Malkangiri, there ensued a quarrel concerning cock fighting on the foot of hillock. The accused all of a sudden became got annoyed and assaulted the deceased by a lathi on his hand and head which resulted his fall on the ground. The accused then also assaulted the deceased on his chest with a piece of stone. The deceased died at the spot itself. Anda Madhi (P.W.1) was witnessing the incident and he was threatened by the accused not to disclose it to anybody in the village so as to avoid the recurrence of the same situation which the deceased faced. After return, P.W.1 for some time did not disclose the incident before anybody. However, on the next day, it was told by him to the villagers and soon thereafter, the accused absconded from the village. The elder brother of the deceased (P.W.12) on receiving the information about the incident came to the village and having collected further information, reported the matter in writing at Malkangiri P.S. Pursuant to the same, Malkangiri P.S. Case No.165 of 2006 was registered and investigation started. The Investigating Officer (P.W.13) having completed the investigation, submitted charge sheet placing the accused for Trial in the Court of law.

(3.) In the Trial, the prosecution in order to bring home the charge against the accused examined 13 witnesses and proved the FIR (Ext.6), Inquest Report (Ext.1), Postmortem Report (Ext.4) and other documents such as seizure lists, spot map, chemical examination report etc. The learned Trial Court, having analyzed the evidence on record, and upon their evaluation found the evidence with regard to the happening of the incident as also to the role of the accused in assaulting the deceased by means of that lathi on his head and stone on his chest as acceptable. However, relying on the evidence of the doctor (P.W.11), who conducted the post mortem examination and opined that the said injury on the head resulting subdural hematoma leading to coma, to be the cause of death and further taking into account the circumstances leading to the incident as also the role played by the accused as emanating from the evidence of P.W.1, the solitary eye witness, the Trial Court has held the accused guilty of offence under section304-II of the IPC and thus has been sentenced as aforesaid. The accused, in the Trial, had taken the plea of denial. However, no evidence has been let in from his side.