BIJAYA KUMAR SAHU Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 4-10-1986 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, kalahandi, Bhawanipatna convicting the appellant under Section 304, Part II, IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years in S. C. No. 11 of 1986.

(2.) PROSECUTION case in brief is that on 25-10-1985 at about 10. 00 a. m. in the morning, the appellant and co-accused suratha Kumar Sahu (since acquitted)rebuted one Govinda Chandra Sahu due to some dispute relating to construction of a house. But said Govinda Chandra Sahu did not report the matter to the police as the accused persons belonged to his family. On the same day at about 8 p. m. Falguni Sahu, younger brother of Govinda Chandra Sahu, returned from his father-in-law's house and went to ascertain the cause of the quarrel that took place in the morning. The informant also followed him. At that time, both the appellant and co-accused were sitting with some goonda type people. All of a sudden, co-accused Suratha Kumar Sahu being armed with a sword came to assault falguni Sahu, but the sword was snatched away from him. At the same time, the present appellant came armed with a lathi to assault Falguni Sahu, which was also snatched away from him. While coming back, the appellant went to his house, brought a tangia and gave a blow with the same from the backside of Falguni Sahu on his head, as a result of which Falguni Sahu fell down on the ground. However, he got up and went to his house, where he fell down senseless. Thereafter, the informant took falguni to the police station and gave a written report. On receipt of the same, the officer-in-charge, Bhawanipatna town P. S. registered a case under Section 307/34, IPC. But on the next day, i. e. 26-10-1985 at about 1. 10 p. m. Falguni succumbed to the injuries at the hospital. After completion of the investigation, charge-sheet under Section 302/34, IPC was filed against the appellant and co-accused Suratha Kumar Sahu (since acquitted)

(3.) THE plea of the accused persons was complete denial of the allegation. They also stated that the case has been falsely filed against them. The present appellant took the further plea that he at the time of occurrence, was in his shop situated at manikeswari Chhak.