DHRUTARASHTRA BEHERADALAI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant, having been convicted for commission of offence under section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for commission of said offence, has preferred this appeal from jail.

(2.) THE prosecution case, as per F.I.R. (Ext. 1), is that on 2.3.1999, the informant (P.W.1) who is the wife of the deceased lodged a report at Nuagaon out -post stating therein that her husband (Pratap Singh) had been to his Brinjal field to work there and after working there, he was taking rest under a mango tree. At about 11:00 AM, the appellant holding a Tangia came there and dealt a blow to the head of her husband for which he died instantaneously at the spot. Kanda Patra (P.W.8) who was working there in the nearby field told her (P.W.1) about the incident. The case was registered and ultimately, after completion of the investigation and other formalities, police filed charge -sheet against the present appellant and other two accused persons, namely, Pitamber Beheradalai and Purushotam Patra under sections 302/109 IPC. But at the time of consideration of charge, the above two accused persons were discharged u/s. 227 Cr.P.C. Finally, as against the present appellant, charge u/s. 302 I.P.C. was framed.

(3.) IN order to bring home the charge, during trial, the prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses and exhibited 19 documents. The defence examined none despite being provided with said opportunity.