BHRAMAR PATRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal challenges the order dated 19.6.1993 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar in S. T. Case No. 122 of 1991, whereby the appellants have been convicted under Section 302, read with Section 34, of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), for having committed the murder of the deceased Siropani Patrain furtherance of their common intention, and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.

(2.) THE skeletal picture of the prosecution case, as unravelled during the course of trial is as follows : On 20.8.1991 between 6.30 and 7.00 P.M., a cow belonging to appellant Bhramar, who is the brother of the deceased, entered into the pulse field (Harada Kiari) of the deceased and damaged the crop. Seeing this, the deceased Siropani Patra along with his wife Gitarani Patra (P.W. 1) rushed to the field and tried to drive the cow out. While they were doing so, the appellants came being armed with Lathis. There was some altercation whereupon the appellants assaulted the deceased, as a result of which he fell down on the ground with bleeding injuries. In course assault, P.W. 2, another brother of the deceased, arrived at the spot. Both P.Ws. 1 and 2 tried to protest against the high handed action of the appellants, who paid no heed to the same. After brutally assaulting the deceased, the appellants left the spot. Siropani was shifted to Ukhunda P.H.C. in an injured state. But, when the condition of the patient started deteriorating, the treating physician advised to shift him to the District Headquarters Hospital, Keonjhar, Siropani remained in an unconscious state continuously for thirteen days and ultimately succumbed to the injuries. P.W. 1, the wife of the deceased, had lodged a written report at Baria P.S., on the basis of which a case under Section 307/34, IPC had been registered against the appellants. Consequent upon the death of Siropani, the case was converted to one under Section 302/34, IPC. The appellants took the plea that a false case was foisted against them on account of previous land dispute between them and the deceased. The prosecution, in order to bring home the charge to the appellants, had mainly relied upon the evidence of P.Ws. 1 and 2, who were the wife and brother respectively of the deceased, apart from other official witnesses. On seeing the testimony of P.W. 1, it has appeared that on the date of occurrence, a cow belonging to appellant Bhramar entered into their field and damaged the crop. So, she along with her deceased husband drove the cow away from the field. At that time, the appellants, who were armed with Lathis, challenged the action of Siropani. It has been further deposed that the appellant Bhramar gave a push to the deceased, as a reason whereof, the latter fell down on the ground. Thereafter, Bhramar gave a blow on his head, followed by appellant Chakradhar. As a result of such assault, her husband became unconscious. So, she made an outcry in order to prevent theappellants from assaulting her husband any further. At this juncture, P.W. 2 reached at the spot and noticed appellant Chakradhar giving a Lathi blow on the head of Siropani. P.W. 2, Banchhanidhi Patra, who has claimed to be an eye -witness, corroborated the evidence of P.W. 1 to the extent that he saw appellant Chakradhar assaulting the deceased on the head. On a combined reading of the evidence of P.Ws. 1 and 2, it has been firmly established that the appellant Chakradhar had assaulted the deceased on his head.

(3.) NOW , coming to the evidence of the Medical Officer (P.W. 6} who had treated the deceased Siropani, it is seen that the deceased had received for injuries, which are as follows :