STATE OF ORISSA Vs. KANHU MOHAPATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred against the order of acquittal granted in favour of the accused-respondents by learned Assistant Sessions Judge- cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purl on 23- 7-1986 in S.T. Case No. 1/2 of 1986 arising out of G.R. Case No. 1026 of 1984 of the Court of Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Puri.

(2.) According to the case of the prosecution, there was ill-feeling between the accused persons and Lokanath Das (P.W. No. 2). On 30-8-1984, while P.W. No. 2 accompanied by P.Ws. 1 and 3, each occupying separate bi-cycles were going on the public road leading to Brahmagiri, at about 8.30 p.m. near Puri-Nimapara Co-operative Bank, the three accused persons came and attempted to commit murder of P.W. No. 2. According to the allegations of the prosecution, respondents 1 and 2 dealt respectively Farsa blows on his right hand and on his face. Accused sustained bleeding injuries and fell down at the spot. Accused persons, who were three in number fled away from the spot, P.W. No. 2 was brought to the Medical Dispensary at Brahmagiri and thereafter the Police at Brahmagiri was intimated. The Officer-in-charge, Brahmagiri Police Station registered P.S. Case No. 97 of 1984 and undertook the investigation in a routine manner and on completion of investigation, submitted charge-sheet against three accused persons for the offence under S. 307, I.P.C. Accused persons took the plea of complete denial and stated about false accusation because of previous enmity.

(3.) To substantiate the charge, prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses. Out of them, as noted above, P.W. No. 2 is the injured, P.W. Nos. 1 and 3 claimed to be the eye-witnesses to the occurrence being travelling together with P.W. No. 2 at the relevant time, P.W. Nos. 5 and 6 claimed as independent eye-witnesses to the occurrence, P.W. No. 4 is the Doctor, who examined P.W. No. 2 and granted the injury certificate, Ext. 2 arid P.W. No. 9 is the Investigating Officer and others are witnesses to the seizure. Ext. 1 is the F.I.R. lodged by P.W. No. 1. Ext. 2 is the injury certificate, Exts. 3 and 5 are the seizure lists and Ext. 4 is the zimanama. No material object was produced by the prosecution. Defence declined to adduce any evidence from its side.