ISWAR DEHURY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD this Jail Criminal Appeal is as against the order of conviction passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Deogarh in Sessions Trial Case No. 75/9 of 2002.

(2.) PROSECUTION case is that on 24.10.2001 the deceased went with the accused to consume Handia. They left house of the accused at about 4 P.M. In the night, the accused returned to his house but the deceased did not. On the query of P.W. 2, the widow of the deceased, accused replied that the deceased had gone to a Blacksmith. But on the following day morning, i.e., on 25.10.2001, P.W. 2 discovered the dead body of the deceased amongst a bushy forest and intimated the fact to villagers saying that on the previous day the deceased had gone together with the accused to consume Handia. The villagers confronted the circumstances to the accused at the instance of Grama Rakhi, but he gave evasive reply and when the Grama Rakhi with threat asked him to tell the truth, he made extra -judicial confession stating that he committed murder of the deceased for Rs. 10/ - which was under the possession of the deceased and that he used a piece of bolder weighing 4 -5 kgs. to strike on the head to the deceased of crush the same. Accused also gave recovery of a stone from a nalla. Thereafter, FIR was lodged, investigation was undertaken and ultimately the charge sheet was submitted.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellant argues that the evidence on record was neither properly perused nor evaluated by the Trial Court and as a result of that a mistake was committed by finding the accused guilty of the aforesaid offence. According to Learned Counsel for the appellant, the evidence of P.W. 5 as has been reported under Ext. 5 together with absence of reliable information on the last seen together corroborating the post mortem report about the time of death suggests thereby that the accused could not have been the author of the crime.