CHAITANYA PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS ail criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Angul in S.T. Case No. 343 of 2001/29 of 2001 convicting the appellant under section 302, I.P.C. sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life.

(2.) THIS is a case of triple murder wherein the accused -appellant has been convicted for having committed murder of his father -in -law (Rajan Pradhan), mother -in -law (Urmila Pradhan) and wife (Subha Pradhan). Informant Duryodhan Pradhan (P.W. 1) is the uncle -in -law of the accused -appellant and younger brother of deceased Rajan pradhan, brother -in -law of deceased Urmila Pradhan and uncle of deceased Subha Pradhan. as narrated by him in the F.I.R., on 27.10.2000 at about 11.00 a.m. while he was tending the buffaloes the accused holding a 'tangia' appeared and requested him to take care of his children, as he had killed three persons and proceeding to the Court. To the query made by the informant as to who are they, the accused told the names of the deceased persons and went away towards the jungle. On his way to the spot Lata Pradhan (P.W. 2) prohibited him not to proceed further by stating that the accused was moving with a 'tangia' after killing the deceased persons. He, however, reached at the spot and seeing the deceased persons lying dead went to the house of Sudam (P.W. 3 son of deceased Rajan Pradhan and Urmila Pradhan and brother of deceased Subha pradhan. As per instruction of Sudam (P.W. 3), he went to Kiakata Outpsot alongwith the Gramrakhi (P.W. 3) of their village and lodged the F.I.R. Consequently, the police registered the case, proceeded with the investigation and on its completion laid charge -sheet under sections 302/201, I.P.C. against the accused - appellant. On receipt of the chargesheet, cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Session for trial.

(3.) DURING trial the accused -appellant took the plea of complete denial and false implication. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined as many as 22 witnesses including the doctor and Investigation Officers and Exhibited 27 documents including the post - mortem report and chemical examination report.