SURYA PRASAD ROUT Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has been convicted under section 307, I.P.C. and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years on the allegation that he attempted to commit murder by stabbing knife (sic) on P.W. 2, a girl aged 15 years but was unsuccessful in his attempt. The motive is that the petitioner persuaded the victim girl to marry him but the girl refused.

(2.) PROSECUTION case is that the parents of the victim girl (P.W. 2) work as doctors in the Sundargarh District Headquarters Hospital. The petitioner was residing in the house of his sister who happens to be a nurse in the hospital, whose quarter is nearby the quarters of parents of P.W. 2. On 8.5.1978 in the morning at about 8 A.M. P.W. 2 went to the school and returned half an hour after with some of her friends including P.W. 5 to her house. P.W. 2 went to a short distance to see off her friends and while she was returning the petitioner came from a nearby place in a threatening attitude and while P.W. 2 was proceeding hurriedly towards the quarter, the petitioner caught hold of her left hand and stabbed a knife on her right stomach, waist and P.W. 2 fell down when the petitioner gave some blows on her face. P.W. 2 was taken to the hospital where P.W. 1, the doctor examined and treated her. It is further alleged that the petitioner went to Sundargarh Sadar Police Station and before the Officer -in -charge (PW 8) and in presence of P.W. 6 produced the knife (M.O. I) which was seized by the Investigating Officer. The defence plea is complete denial of the incident but the petitioner has admitted that prior to the occurrence. P.W. 2 used to come to his house for lessons and he was treating her as his younger sister. He never gave any proposal for marriage. He has taken further plea of insanity at the time of occurrence.

(3.) P .W. 2 is the victim girl and P.W. 3 is an eye -witness to the occurrence. P.W. 3 has narrated the incident immediately after the occurrence to P.W. 4. The evidence of P.W. 2 is corroborated not only by the doctor. P.W. 1 as to the existence of the injuries on her body by means of a knife but also by the evidence of P.Ws. 3 and 4. P.W. 5 is the friend of P.W. 2 who narrated the fact that she had gone with P.W. 2 to the house of her parents and P.W. 2 came back to leave her at some distance. After going through the evidence, I am satisfied that the prosecution has been able to establish that the petitioner has assaulted P.W. 2 by means of a knife which he produced before the Investigating Officer at the Police Station shortly after the occurrence. The knife has also been seized in presence of P.W. 6. Accordingly, I hold that the prosecution has been able to establish the story of assault on P.W. 2 by the petitioner.