STATE Vs. PABITRA GIRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State is in appeal against the judgment and order recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj Keonjhar, Baripada, holding the respondents who stood charged under Ss.148, 302 read with Ss. 149, 323 and 436, Penal Code, (for short, 'the Code') not guilty and acquitting them. The facts of the prosecution case and the plea of the defence have been set nut in the impugned, judgment. Upon hearing Mr. P.K. Mohanty, the learned Additional Standing Counsel and Mr. J.M. Mohanty for the respondents, we see no case for interference in this appeal against acquittal for the brief reasons to follow.

(2.) The respondents stood charged under S.148 of the Code with having formed an unlawful assembly being armed with dangerous instruments in prosecution of their common object of assaulting and killing Purusottam Naik (to be referred to hereinafter as the 'deceased') and under S.302 read with S.149 of the Code for having committed his murder in prosecution of their common object. Some of the respondents stood charged under Ss.325 and 323 of the Code for voluntarily causing grievous hurt and simple hurt to some persons of the party of the deceased.

(3.) The case of the prosecution was that there had been a land dispute between the deceased on the one hand and the respondents on the other and the respondent's side joined hands and committed the murder of the deceased in prosecution of their common object and caused grievous hurt and simple hurt to some persons of the party of the deceased. The trial Court has held that the charges have not been brought home to the respondents, after a consideration of the evidence adduced by the prosecution for the reasons recorded in the judgment which need not be restated in this affirming judgment, as it is not necessary so to do in view of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court ' in 1981Cri LJ 1019 : AIR 1981 SC 1417, State of Karnataka v. Hemareddy.