RATAN NAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 06.05.1995 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Koraput at Jeypore, in Sessions Case No. 187 of 1994. whereby and whereunder the Appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC") for committing the murder of his father Madan Naik and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.

(2.) The brief history of the prosecution case, as unraveled during trial is as follows:

(3.) ON a brief resume of the evidence of P.W.1, who is the brother of the Appellant, it is noticed that on the date of occurrence, the deceased was sitting near the entrance door of his house and was taking his meal. P.W.1 was also taking his meal in his house. At that juncture, the deceased protested the Appellant from extracting juice without paying any money to him. He demanded Rs. 5/ - which the deceased refused to pay. There was a quarrel between them. Then the Appellant went the house, broke open the lock of a room and brought out an axe. At that time, his father tried to escape, but the Appellant, in a fit of anger, chased him and inflicted 3 -4 blows, as a result of which the deceased fell down on the ground. He has also stated that he tried to dissuade the Appellant from assaulting his father, but such request did not yield any result. Nothing has been elicited from this witness in cross -examination. It is not understood why P.W.1 would depose against the Appellant, who is his own brother. Coming to the medical evidence, it has transpired that the deceased Madan Naik received four injuries, which were ante mortem in nature. Cause of death was due to respiratory failure. P.W.3, who was the wife of the Appellant, did not support the prosecution and was accordingly, declared hostile. P.W.4 was the then Ward Member of the village. He is a post -occurrence witness. He had also gone with P.W.1 to lodge report at the police -station. P.Ws. 5 and 6 are also post -occurrence witnesses. From their testimony, it has transpired that the Appellant made extra -judicial confession before them admitting to have killed his own father. P.Ws. 7, 8 and 9 are witnesses to the seizure of the incriminating materials. The Appellant himself produced the axe at the police -station, which was sent for chemical examination, and human blood of "AB" origin was detected on it. The Lungi worn by the Appellant and the Dhoti worn by the deceased at the time of occurrence were also sent for chemical examination and human blood of "AB" origin was found on them. Thus, on a plain reading of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses and also the report of the Serologist, it can unerringly be concluded that the Appellant was the perpetrator of the crime, who committed the gruesome murder of his father.