STATE OF ORISSA Vs. SUKRA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the State under Section 417, Criminal Procedure Code from the judgement of acquittal dated 5 -12 -70 of the Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj -Keonjhar passed in S. T. No. 30 -M of 1969 whereby accused -respondent Sukra Singh has been acquitted of the charge under Section 302, I.P.C. for having committed murder of one Budhu Singh, his paternal uncle.

(2.) THE prosecution story may now be related. The deceased had 5 brothers. His elder brother Durga Singh having died he married the latter's widow Gurubari, who is P.W. 1. The accused is the son of Gurubari by her first husband Durga Singh. He, the deceased, and P.Ws. 1 to 4 belong to the same village. On 20 -3 -69 Selei Puja was being performed in the village and general feast was being held on that occasion. All villagers, both young or old., congregated at the Puja to participate in the feast. The feast was over before dusk and all the villagers left that place for their respective houses. Chukulu (P.W. 3) is another brother of the deceased. While the deceased and P.W. 3 were returning home they had quarrelled and the deceased was about to throttle him when P.W. 1 intervened and separated them. Another brother of the deceased is one Sagram in whose house his mother was living. P.W. 1 was also sleeping there for want of space in the house of the deceased. The deceased came to the house of Sagram to call his mother to participate in the feast, but was informed by his wife (P.W. 1) that she had already gone to sleep. The deceased, thereupon, sat in front of the room where his wife was sleeping and called for a chadar. Subsequently, P.W. 3 also arrived there to get some tobacco and finding the deceased sitting there slapped him. Both of them were slightly tipsy. On being thus assaulted the deceased got up and caught hold of P.W. 3 and a tussle between them ensued in which each began to assault the other manually. While so fighting, the deceased dragged P.W. 3 to the adjoining open bari of Same Singh and threw him on the ground and began to throttle him. P.W. 3 who was no match for the deceased in physical prowess called out the accused by name for help. The accused, whose house was nearby, rushed to the spot with a stick and gave a blow on the head of the deceased who then released P.W. 3 and sat down on the ground. By that time P.Ws. 1 and 2 had already arrived there. After the accused dealt the blow to the deceased, Iswar (P.W. 2) and Chukulu (P.W. 3) snatched away the stick from his hand obviously with a view to save the deceased from further assault. The accused then ran back to his house and came armed with bow and arrows and shot two arrows at the deceased. P.W. 3 snatched the bow and arrows from the accused who then ran away. Within an hour or so of this occurrence, the deceased expired.

(3.) THE defence, as appears from statement of the accused under Section 342, Criminal Procedure Code is a total denial. A secondary defence was adopted during cross -examination of P.Ws., according to which the accused shot two arrows in the darkness to escape pursuit by P.Ws. 2, 3 and one Dapang, another brother of the deceased, who was armed with a stick, and those arrows might have accidently hit the deceased.