DHANANA PRATAP Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Charged under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the Code) and ultimately convicted under section 304 Part I of the Code and sentenced there under to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years, the appellants in these two appeals, which have been heard together and will be governed by this common judgment, assail the finding recorded by the trial court that after night-fall on November 16, 1981, they assaulted C. Venkata Ravana (to be referred to hereinafter as the deceased) to death in furtherance of their common intention by dealing slaps and blows and by the process of strangulation inside a room of the Blood Bank building at Rayagada in the district of Koraput. The order of conviction has mainly been rested on the evidence of three witnesses to the occurrence, namely, Barili Uma (P.W. 1), Radha Pujari (P.W. 2) and Majhi Ramesh (P.W. 8) coupled with the medical evidence.

(2.) It is not disputed at the Bar that the deceased had died a homicidal death. The learned counsel for the appellants have submitted that the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 8 has no intrinsic worth and ought not to have been accepted. The learned Standing Counsel has fairly submitted that it would be difficult to sustain the order of conviction on such evidence in the absence of any reasonable explanation coming from the side of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 8 with regard to the belated disclosure regarding the commission of such an act until their examination by the Investigating Officer on November 23, 1981.

(3.) It would be seen from the evidence and it has not seriously been disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants that during the night of November 16, 1981, Barili Uma (P.W. 1) and Radha Pujari (P.W. 2) had been to Rama Talkies at Rayagada to see a picture where on the request of the appellant Hemantha, P.W. 2 had been purchasing some tickets for the appellant Hemantha and his companions as there had been rush at the male counter. The evidence would also indicate that the appellant Nukaraju reached that place and questioned P.W. 1 as to why she had come with his brother Hemantha to the cinema hall and so saying, he took away his wearing belt and whirled it and dealt a slap on the person of P.W. 1, who on her own showing, had on occasions been going to the cinema hall with other male persons without informing her husband. Thereafter, as the evidence would disclose, the appellants left the scene and on the way, proceeded towards the Blood Bank building with the deceased. P.Ws. 1, 2 and 8 had testified that they had seen the appellants assaulting the deceased although it was not in their evidence that the deceased died on the spot in their presence.