MADAN PRADHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prosecution has presented an extremely pathetic case of a father killing his two sons aged three years and one year in painful circumstances. The appellant with his wife (P. W. 1) and his two sons Ranjan and Niranjan (to be described hereinafter as the 'deceased') was staying in the house of) his mother -in -law. His lusty eyes fell on the younger sister of his wife whom he wanted to have his own. This was not accepted to, Dissensions grew and after dividing the produce of the land, the appellant left the house of his mother -in -law (P. W. 2) for his own viliage on December 29, 1980, with his wife and the deceased persons carrying some paddy, utensils and household articles in a bullock -cart. On the way, the appellant asked his wife (P. W. 1) to wash the utensils in the waters of a Jora(water stream). P. W. 1 left with the utensils. The appellant then brought out a Tangia (M. O. I) and killed his two children by dealing successive blows on their necks and other portions and left the place with the blood -stained weapon. P. W. 1 informed P. W. 3 who was passing by, in turn, informed some persons about what had happened. When P. Ws. 4 and 5 came to the scene of attack, P. W. 1 narrated the incident to them. The appellant was searched for and apprehended by the Grama Rakshi (P. W. 5) who had been accompanied by P. W. 4, near the spot with the weapon in hand stained with blood which the appellant threw on the ground on being asked by P. W. 5. The first information report was lodged by P. W. 2 and investigation was taken up in course of which the blood -stained M. O. I was seized by the Investigating Officer (P. W. 11). The appellant made a judicial confession (Ext. 6). On the completion of investigation, a charge sheet was placed and the appellant was prosecuted. The appellant's plea was one of denial and false implication.

(2.) TO bring home the charge Under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for commission of the murders of the two children, the prosecution had examined eleven wit nesses. The appellant had examined none in his defence. The trial Court has held the charge to be established and while convicting the appellant Under Section 302 of the Code, has sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life.

(3.) THERE can be no doubt from the evidence of the doctor (P. W. 8) that the two children had met with homicidal deaths. This aspect has not been challenged in this Court.