ROUTA MUNDA @ MATHURA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Jail Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 11.02.2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sundargarh in Sessions Trial No.141 of 1998 convicting the appellant under Section 302 of I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo R.I. for a further period of one year.

(2.) The prosecution case in brief is that the appellant and deceased were having strained relationship; as a result of which, there was a quarrel between them. On 3.1.1998, a meeting was held on the thrashing floor of P.W.6 to settle the dispute. In that meeting the deceased started shouting and abused the villagers present there for which there was altercation between the appellant and the deceased. After the meeting, the village gentries went away and the deceased being drunk slept in the agricultural yard (khala) of P.W.6. Later on, the appellant came and assaulted the deceased by means of blunt side of the axe, as a result of which, the deceased sustained severe bleeding injuries and died. Thereafter, the appellant along with P.W.5, his brother-in-law proceeded to Koida Police Station and surrendered before P.W.15, the S.I. of Police along with blood-stained axe. Accordingly, the appellant was taken into custody and the act of his surrender and production of weapon of offence was noted down in the Station Diary. Later on, P.W.1 orally reported the incident and the same was reduced to writing and was treated as F.I.R. Accordingly, the investigation started. During course of investigation, the I.O. examined the witnesses, visited spot, held inquest over the dead body and commanded the Havildar (P.W.10) to escort the dead body to P.W.16 for autopsy. The I.O. also seized the wearing apparels of the appellant as well as the deceased, sample blood stained earth from the spot and got the weapon of offence examined by the doctor (P.W.16) and despatched all material objects for chemical examination. Upon completion of investigation, the police submitted charge sheet against the appellant under Section 302 of I.P.C. The plea of the appellant was of complete denial.

(3.) The prosecution in order to bring home charges examined as many as 16 witnesses including the doctor and two investigating officers and exhibited around 17 documents and produced Budia as M.O.I. P.W.1 is the informant and also a witness before whom the appellant had confessed his crime. P.Ws.2, 3 and 4 are formal witnesses. P.W.5 is the brother-in-law of the appellant before whom he made confession. P.Ws.6, 7, 8 and 9 are the witnesses who turned hostile during their examination in the court. P.W.10 is the Havildar, who escorted the dead body and produced the same before P.W.16, the doctor, who conducted the autopsy. P.Ws.11 and 12 are the witnesses to the seizure of the wearing apparels of the deceased. P.Ws.14 and 15 are the investigating officers in this case. In the examination under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., the appellant denied all the questions put to him. From the side of defence, nobody was examined nor any document was marked as exhibit. On completion of trial, the appellant was found guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C.