(1.) Undisputedly there has been homicidal death of two persons and serious injuries on the throat of another. Prosecution alleges that Mohan Raj @ Madan Mohan Raj (hereinafter referred to as 'accused') is the author of these crimes and therefore, has to be dealt with under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'IPC') and Sections 307 and 309 thereof. Learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Puri has accepted that to be the case. Accused assault his order of conviction and sentence of imprisonment for life as awarded for offence punishable under Sections 302/307, I.P.C. and one year for offence punishable under Section 309, I.P.C.
(2.) Prosecution version as unfolded during' trial essentially is as follows :
(3.) Eighteen witnesses were examined to further the prosecution case. P.W. 1 is the informant. P.W. 2 is the father of deceased who stated about the wrist watch lying near the head of the deceased Ranka and missing of gold necklaces from her neck. P.W. 3 is the sister of deceased and P.W. 4, a neighbour of P.W. 2 found the accused running away on the night of occurrence. P.W. 7 in the injured and son of deceased Ranka. P.W. 8 is the husband of deceased Ranka while P.W. 9 is the brother of both the deceased and close friend of the accused. P.W. 10 has stated about extra judicial confession made before him and P.W. 11 is the Scientific Officer who compared the finger prints. Since there was no eye-witness to the occurrence, learned trial Judge referred to circumstantial evidence led by prosecution. Some of the circumstances highlighted by prosecution are : (a) deceased Ranka was last seen with the accused; (b) recovery of articles and finger prints on the articles used for closing the door; (c) conduct of the accused; and (d) extra judicial confession. Learned trial Judge held that there was complete chain of circumstance which unerringly pointed out the accused to be the author of crime. With those conclusions, he held the accused guilty and sentenced him as aforesaid.