KANDIA SAHU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above mentioned two criminal appeals arise out of one and the same judgement, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal in Sessions Trial No. 2 -A of 1968, whereby all the three appellants stand convicted under Section 120 -B(1), I.P.C. and have been sentenced thereunder to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years. Appellant Duryodhan has also been convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. and has been sentenced thereunder to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. The above mentioned sentences against appellant Duryodhan have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) IN the trial court, charges under Sections 302, I.P.C. and 120 -B(1), I.P.C. were framed against appellant Duryodhan, and charge under Section 120 -B(1), I.P.C. alone was framed against the appellants Kandia Sahu and Sadananda Biswal. They all pleaded not guilty to the above mentioned charges.

(3.) THE defence case is a total denial of the entire prosecution case, Appellant Duryodhan has stated in his Section 342 statement that he has been falsely implicated in this case as he stopped rendering service to the deceased. Both the other two appellants, in their statements under Section 342 of the Code, deny the entire prosecution case against them, and state that a false case has been foisted against them. The defence did not adduce any evidence.