MAGDALI PANDAN ALIAS HEMRAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE order of conviction under Section 302, IPC and the sentence to undergo R.I. for life passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sundargarh in S.T. No. 175 of 1993 has been assailed in this appeal.

(2.) THE following facts in brief has led to filing of this criminal appeal:

(3.) THE prosecution in all had examined 7 witnesses of which P.Ws. 1 to 3 are said to be eye -witnesses to the occurrence. P.W.1, Marsel Bodra, has claimed to be an eye -witness and was present at the spot during occurrence. He went to the case land during delivery of possession by P.W.5. He has also proved the FIR, Ext. 1, and identified the Tangia. M.O.I., and also seizure of the Tangia under Ext. 2. From the evidence of P.W.1 it appears that he not only corroborated the averments in the FIR but has stated that on 26.5.93 at about 11 a.m. on being invited by the Police Officer he went to the case land alongwith Johan Munda, Philip Horo, Hunas Horo, Lucas Munda, Raiman Pandan, Habartus Pandan and Ors. . At that time the deceased Johan Pandan was standing on the ridge of 'Hes Nala'. The Appellant suddenly appeared at the scene of occurrence, and discriminately assaulted the deceased Johan Pandan from his backside by means of a Tangia as a result of which he fell down on the ground. P.W.1 rushed to the scene of occurrence. The Writer Constable snatched away the Tangia from the Hand of the Appellant and the Appellant was taken to the Police Station. The matter was explained at the Police Station which was reduced to writing and after the contents were read over and explained to P.W.1, he signed thereon. Ext. 1 was the FIR and P.W.1 proved his signature on the same. He was also a witness to the seizure list, Ext. 2. on which he too signed.