PURNA PALAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant with three co-accused persons, namely, Bachha Khatai, Batu alias Bhagawan Swain and Pampu alias Paramjit Singh, stood their trial in the Court of Session at Sambalpur being charged under S.302 read with S.34, Penal Code (for short, the 'Code). The facts of the prosecution case and the plea of the defence of denial by the appellant and the co-accused persons have been set out in the impugned judgment- Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution was that owing to the rivalry between the members of the Shakti Club to which the deceased belonged and the members of the Bazar group including the appellant and the co-accused persons besides others, the deceased was chased and attacked on January 30, 1981, in the evening while he was coming from Kadampada side and assaulted in front of the hospital by means of lathis by the appellant and the co-accused persons for which he fell unconscious and was removed to the hospital at Hirakud where he was first treated and then he underwent an operation in the Medical College Hospital at Burla and succumbed to the injuries received by him on the day following. On the basis of the first information report (Ext. 10) lodged by P. W. 12. the brother of the deceased, investigation was taken up and on its completion, charge-sheet was placed by the investigating agency. The appellant and the co-accused persons were prosecuted being charged under S.302 read with S.34 of the Code.

(2.) To bring home the charge, the prosecution had examined eighteen witnesses. Of them, P.Ws. 7 to 12 had figured as witnesses to the occurrence. P.Ws. 7 to 9 did not fully support the case of the prosecution and did not implicate all the alleged assailants for which they were put leading questions by the prosecution under S.154, Evidence Act. In support of the defence that the deceased had sustained a fatal injury as a result of a heavy dash at the door of one of the rooms of the hospital in the process of falling down and to substantiate its case of false implication owing to previous rivalry between the two groups, the defence had examined one witness.

(3.) On a consideration of the evidence, the learned Sessions Judge held that the death of the deceased was homicidal and not accidental in nature. The finding of the trial Court was that there was no evidence against the accused persons other than the appellant to sustain the charge. They were accordingly acquitted. The appellant has been found to have dealt the fatal blow on the person of the deceased which had resulted in his death and he has been convicted under S.302 of the Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.