MANDEI KALA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal from the District Jail, Keonjhar, Mandei Kala (hereinafter described as the 'accused') calls in question legality of his conviction under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, the 'IPC') and sentence of imprisonment for life as awarded by the learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar. The accused along with three others, namely Redu @ Sonia Kala, Patua @ Ramrai Tamulla and Thala @ Birsa Munda stood charged under sections 148/ 302/149/201, I.P.C. A specific charge under section 302, IPC was framed against accused Mandei Kala alone. He was also convicted under sections 148/201/302/149, I.P.C. the sentences awarded for the last mentioned three offences were rigorous imprisonment for one year for the first two and two years for the last one. The sentences upon to run concurrently.

(2.) THE background facts as presented by the prosecution, are that on 22.7.1986 in the evening the accused Mandei and others assaulted one Bhaskar Patra by means of various weapons. On 24.7.1986 at about 4 p.m. one Dhena Patra, who happens to be the cousin brother of Bhaskar Patra (hereinafter described as the' deceased'), appeared in Bamebari Out Post and reported about missing of the deceased on the basis of which a station diary entry was made. The A.S.I. Police attached to the Out Post proceeded for inquiry into the matter near Sakradihi hutting and during the course of inquiry Bithal Patra lodged written report which was treated as the First Information Report. As per the said report on the date of occurrence the informant Bithal Patra had gone to his village Purunadihi from Sakradihi hutting where he was staying for purchasing rice and after purchasing rice he was returning to his hutting area. While so returning he could see that all the accused persons and one Jairam Munda were assaulting the deceased by means of stones and the deceased was requesting them to spare him. But the accused persons did not pay any heed to his requests for mercy and went on assaulting. The informant thereafter came to his house while the accused persons were still assaulting. Son of the informant Banamali Patra (P.W. 5), Chinta Patra (P.W. 11), Padan Naik and Sukra Munda had witnessed the assault. Some time thereafter the son of the informant came to his house and told that the deceased was again assaulted and was dragged towards the jungle. One Gokul Munda (P.W. 10) and Laxmidhar Naik (P.W. 6) had seen the accused persons assaulting the deceased. Accused Mandei Kala was a labour Union leader and since he had some differences with the deceased, the former and his hench -men committed the ghastly act. During the course of investigation, the dead body of the deceased was located in a state of decomposition. The same was sent for post mortem examination. During the search of the house of accused Mandei Kala, a tangia which was carried by the deceased at the time of occurrence was seized. Since accused Jairam Munda had absconded, the case was split up so far as he was concerned. The other four accused persons named above faced their trial.

(3.) THE prosecution case mainly rests on the evidence of eye witnesses P.Ws. 1, 5, 9 and 11, who witnessed the first part of the occurrence relating to assault on the deceased by means of stones and shoes. P.Ws. 6 and 10 are stated to be eye witnesses to the later part of the occurrence near the cave.