JAGADISH MAHANTA Vs. SATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being saddled with the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed in S.T. No. 84 of 1990 on the file of learned Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj at Baripada convicting him for a charge under Section 304 Para-II I.P.C. (for short "the I.P.C.") and directing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years, files this criminal appeal challenging the same. Bereft of unnecessary details, the prosecution case runs as thus;

(2.) On the basis of the aforesaid prosecution case, the trial court framed court framed a charge under-Section 302 IPC against the appellant and as the appellant did not plead guilt of the charge, the prosecution examined as many as seven witnesses and also exhibited certain documents to being home the charge. The appellant took a plea of denial and the death of the deceased to be accidental, but not adduce any independent witness to support his plea.

(3.) During course of hearing, learned counsel for the appellant submits that this case, there no cogent material to come to a conclusion that the deceased died a homicidal death and the appellant proves a case that the death of the deceased was an accidental fall by preponderance of probability, the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence is unsustainable in the eye of law.