KAMEYA GACHHA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) NONE appears for the revision petitioner inspite of repeated calls. It appears from the order sheet of the Revision Petition that on earlier occasion when the matter was listed on 25.11.2002 and 23.3.2004, none had appeared for the petitioner even though the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State was present. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State is present. This is a Revision of the year 1996 and the occurrence is of the year 1993 and in such circumstances, the matter is taken up on merits.

(2.) THE learned Addl. Public Prosecutor submits that this is a Revision against the confirming judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Koraput upholding the conviction and sentence passed under Section 307 I.P.C., and sentencing the petitioner to undergo R.I. for three years. It is submitted that since the Revision is against the findings of facts recorded by the Courts below, the scope of this Revision is limited to examine the glaring defects and illegality in the case, if any, and the Court should not re -appreciate the evidence on record to come to its independent findings.

(3.) THE prosecution case in brief was that on 28.5.1993 at about 11:30 A.M. while the injured Pramod Rath was standing in front of the Korkunda Block Office, the accused came from behind from a nearby tea stall and suddenly stabbed on his chest by means of a knife. Hearing hullah, the informant, Govinda Swarnakar (P.W.5), Ashok Parichha (P.W.9) and Satyaban Patra (P.W.4) intervened and the accused ran away with the knife. The injured having received bleeding injuries, the informant and others took him to the P.H.C. for treatment. Subsequently, he was shifted to the District Headquarter Hospital, Malkanagiri and the Medical Officer there referred him to the District Headquarter Hospital, Koraput for better treatment. The informant lodged the report at Malkanagiri Police Station. The O.I.C. registered the case, took up investigation, issued requisition for medical examination of the injured, seized one blood stained white full shirt on production by the informant, also one blood stained terecotton Punjabi on production by the accused, arrested the accused and while the accused was in custody, he confessed to have stabbed the injured by means of a knife and gave recovery of the knife under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. Charge sheet was submitted thereafter and the petitioner faced the trial. The prosecution appears to have examined 12 witnesses including the injured (P.W.7) and the doctor (P.W.1). The learned Assistant Sessions Judge found on appreciate of evidence that P.W.7 sustained bleeding injuries on his chest by the knife blow given by the accused. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge having recorded the findings that the prosecution has proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt, found the accused guilty of the charge under Section 307 I.P.C., convicted thereunder and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for three years. The learned Sessions Judge, Koraput in Criminal Appeal No. 108 of 1995 as against the order of conviction seems to have taken note of the evidence of the eye witnesses and the doctor and on consideration of the materials on record, has confirmed the findings of the trial Court.