BHALU @ RABI KHATEI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this appeal the seven appellants, namely, Bhalu @ Rabi Khatei (A -1), Jujhia Jena (A -2), Babu Behera (A -3), Rabi Mangaraj @ Polish (A -4), Chhabi @ Sura Barik (A -5), Dunga @ Girish Khatei (A -6) and Bhagabat Nayak (A -7) have challenged the judgment dated 2.2.1994 passed by the Additional sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar convicting all the appellants under Section 302/149 and Section 148, I.P.C. and sentencing them all to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life in respect of their conviction under Section 302/ 149 I.P.C. though no separate sentence was passed in respect of their conviction under Section 148, I.P.C.

(2.) PROSECUTION case, in brief, is that on 24.2.1991 at about 10.05 P.M. one Bichitrananda Pradhan came to Bhubaneswar Police Station and verbally reported that some disturbance was going on in his village Kantilo. The Inspector -in -charge of the Police Station entered this oral report in the station diary under entry No. 676 dated 24.2.1991 and immediately along with other police personnel left for Kantilo village. On their arrival in the village at or about 10.40 P.M. on the very same day P.W. 1 Abhiram Pradhan lodged an oral complaint stating, inter alia, that on that day at or about 2/3 P.M. his nephew Sachidananda Pradhan came to their village from his service place. In the evening P.W.1 had been to the local market and some time thereafter he returned home.His nephew Sachidananda Pradhan (Since deceased) was returning home from the market at or about 8/8.30 P.M. and he was coming from the side of the village Bhagabatghar. The informant Abhiram Pradhan was sitting on the verandah of the house of his elder brother. At that time the accused Babji Subudhi, Benua Subudhi, Kedar Subudhi, appellant No.7 Bhagabat Nayak, accused Arun Paikray, Santu Paikray, Uka Managaraj, Nibas Pradhan and Anu Mangaraj were sitting on the verandah of one Kedar Subudhi. When the deceased and P.W.1 Abhiram Pradhan passed that way, the aforesaid accused persons including appellant No. 7 came down from the verandah. At that time appellant Nos. 1 to 6 also came from the side of the house of one Laxmidhar Khatei being armed with various deadly weapons like Farsha, Bhali (sharp cutting weapon), shovel, pointed weapon (tenta) and lathi (locally called Thenga) and chased the deceased. Apprehending danger, P.W.1 and his brother shouted at the appellants and yet the appellants chased towards them. At that time Gobinda Patra, Shyama Patra and others threw brick bats towards the house of the informant. One brick bat struck the head of the elder brother of the informant who sustained bleeding injury.With his brother the informant entered their house. However, the deceased was chased by the aforesaid accused persons including the appellants and for this reason the deceased could not enter the house but ran towards Bhagabatghar. Out of fear the informant could not come to the front side of their house and the concealed himself behind the heap of straw in the house of P.W.7 Chandramani Badjena Appellants Babu Behera, Rabi Khatei, Chhabi Barik, Dunga Khatei, Jujhia Jena and Rabi Mangaraj were searching for the deceased in the house of P.W. 2 Kartik and threatened P.W.2. They also damaged the house hold articles of P.W.2 Kartik. At that time the informant further heard the noise from the side of the house of Binod Mangaraj that the deceased was there. The persons who were present in front of the house of P.W. 2 Katik as well as the persons who were in the house of Kedar Subudhi entered inside the house of Binod Mangaraj whereas the informant continued to hide himself behind the straw heap and from there he heard the cries of his nephew from the house of Binod. The informant further heard the sound of sword and Farsa. Some time thereafter the informant saw the appellants and other accused persons in the moon light and the light of torch the appellants were holding. He further saw that the appellants Rabi Khatei, Babu Behera, Jujhia Jena, Chhabi Barik, Rabi Mangaraj, Bhagabat Nayak, accused Adikanda Khatei and others were dragging the deceased towards Junakuda from the house of Binod Mangaraj. The deceased was then bleeding and from this the informant suspected that the deceased must have died.Some time thereafter the appellants Rabi Khatei, Rabi Mangaraj and Chhabi Barik shouted on the street to finish others if they dared to venture out. Some time thereafter a police vehicle arrived in the village and seeing the police he came out from the place where the informant was hiding himself and lodged the oral information about this incident. The aforesaid oral information was reduced into writing by the Inspector -in -charge of the said police station and thereafter it was forwarded to the police station where it was registered as an F.I.R. on 25.2.1991 at about 2 A.M. against 19 accused persons including 7 appellants. On the basis of the said F.I.R. a case was registered under Sections 147/148/337/452/325/302/427/324/149, IPC against 19 accused persons including 7 appellants. After usual investigation, charge sheet was filed against 21 accused persons under the aforesaid provisions of the Indian Penal Code. In course of time, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions Judge, Khurda, Bhubaneswar and on transfer the case was tried before the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar. On perusal of the materials on record, the learned trial Court framed as many as five charges against all the appellants including the charges under Section 302/149 and Section 148, IPC.

(3.) IN course of trial, as many as 14 witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Only one witness was examined on behalf of the defence. The version of the appellants and other accused persons in course of trial was that of complete denial of the prosecution version. On conclusion of trial, the appellants were convicted and sentenced as already stated. They were acquitted from the rest of the charges. Other accused persons were acquitted.