PRATAP BEHERA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal challenges the legality, validity and propriety of the order of conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, TIPC) and sentence of imprisonment for life passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar, in Sessions Trial No. 4/97 of 1994.

(2.) The factual matrix leading to this appeal is as follows: P.W. 1, Gouranga Behera who was the brother-in-law of the deceased Kandhia alias Gandhrab Nayak, lodged a report at Sahidnagar Police-station stating that his brother-in-law Kandhia Gandharb Nayakwas staying with his family at Shantipali. He was earning his livelihood as a rickshaw puller and sometimes by playing monkey. On 2/9/1993 at about 4.00 P.W. 1 the appellant Pratap passed some unsavoury comments against Kanchan, the wife of the informant, to which she protested, whereupon the appellant is said to have threatened to assault her. There was some quarrel on the following day, i.e., 3/9/1993, at about 5.00 P.M. The appellant Pratap came armed with a knife and picked up quarrel with Dhruba Gunt, another brother-in-law of the deceased. At this juncture, the deceased Kandhia Gandhargb Nayak intervened and challenged the highhanded action of the appellant. So, he became annoyed and at the spur of the moment plunged a knife blow on the left side of chest of Kandhia Gandharb Nayak causing severe bleeding injury. No sooner did Gandharb fall down on the ground with bleeding injury than the appellant fled away with the knife from the scene of occurrence. It is said that Gandharb succumbed to the injury and died instantaneously. On the basis of the F.I.R., investigation started, in course of which the Sub-Inspector of Police examined the informant, visited the spot and examined witnesses. Inquest was held on the dead body of the deceased Kandhia Gandharb Nayak and it was sent for post mortem examination. The knife stained with blood was seized from the possession of the appellant, who was arrested and forwarded to jail custody. The knife and the wearing apparels of the deceased as also the appellant were sent for chemical examination and serological test. After completion of investigation charge sheet was placed against the sole accused.

(3.) The appellant took the plea of innocence and claimed to have been falsely implicated in this case.