MAKUNDA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE three appellants Makunda alias Magnia Suna, Ramdas alias Budu Suna and Alekha Suna, besides two other persons, namely, Daya Suna and Dhanmat Suna, stood trial in the court of Mr. K. P. Mohapatra, Sessions Judge, Balangir -Kalahandi, being charged under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 307 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C (for short, the 'Code') on the allegations that sometime past 8 p.m. on Nov. 21, 1977, at Karuanjhar in the district of Balangir, the appellants and the co -accused persons, in furtherance of their common intention, committed the murder of Dulava Suna (hereinafter described as the 'deceased') who had land dispute with the accused persons and attempted to commit the murder of his son -in -law Nrupa (PW 7) by severely assaulting them by means of Katari and lathis when the deceased and PW 7 reached the village of the deceased after the deceased got an order in his favour under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a court at Balangir. On the basis of the report lodged at the Bandhapara police outpost within the area of the Tusra police station by Sapneswar (PW 5), the son of the deceased, who was not a witness to the occurrence, but had seen his father lying dead after the murderous assault on him, the Assistant Sub -Inspector of Police (PW 9) made an entry in the station diary, sent a copy of it to the police station and proceeded and guarded the place of occurrence. Under the direction of the Officer -in -charge of the Tusra police station, he took charge of the investigation which was subsequently taken up by the other police officers including PW 13 who submitted the charge -sheet on the completion of investigation.

(2.) TO bring home the charges, the prosecution had examined fourteen witnesses of whom PWs 1 to 3 and were the witnesses to the occurrence. PW 5 was the first informant. PW 4, the Ward member of the village, had testified about the land dispute between the parties. PW 8 was the doctor who had conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased brought to him by the police constable (PW 6), as per his post -mortem report (Ex. 4). He had examined the injured Nrupa (PW 7) and had noticed an abrasion on his forehead, simple in nature, as per his injury report (Ext. 6). PWs 9 to 14 were the police officers who had taken part in the investigation of the case.

(3.) THE learned Sessions Judge, on a consideration of the evidence, found that no case had been made out against the accused Daya and Dhanmat and accordingly they were acquitted of the charges. Accepting the case of the prosecution that the three appellants, in furtherance of. their common intention, committed the murder of the deceased, the learned Judge convicted them under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Code and sentenced each of them thereunder to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. The learned Judge recorded a finding that the charge for attempt to murder had not been established against the appellants and the other co -accused persons, but the appellant Magnia alias Makunda was guilty of the offence of voluntarily causing hurt to Nrupa (PW 7) and he was accordingly convicted under Section 323 of the Code and sentenced thereunder to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year with a direction that the sentence passed under Section 323 of the Code would run concurrently with the sentence passed under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Code.