PRAMOD KUMAR KAR Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Pramod Kumar Kar along with his wife Smt. Kananbala Kar and one Bijaya Kumar Swain faced trial in the Court of learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C., Court No. IV, Cuttack in S.T. Case No.539 of 2006. The appellant was charged under sections 406/294/506/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code whereas the co-accused persons Smt. Kananbala Kar and Bijaya Kumar Swain were charged under sections 294/506/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The prosecution case, as per the first information report dated 13.12005 lodged by Binod Kishore Kar (P.W.2) is that after his retirement from service, the informant in order to purchase a plot at Salipur contacted the appellant on 19.09.2005 who was related to him and accordingly, the appellant agreed to sale a plot to the informant at Salipur which corresponds to Mouza-Lunahar, Khata No.805, Plot No.2101, Area-Ac. 0.153 decimal with a consideration amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- (rupees two lakhs). An agreement was executed between the parties and a sum of Rs. 1,34,000/- was paid by the informant to the appellant as advance in presence of the witnesses and it was further agreed upon between the parties that the balance amount of Rs. 66,000/- will be paid at the time of registration of the sale deed. It is the further prosecution case as per the F.I.R. that on 15.10.2005 the appellant approached the informant and asked for the balance amount for registration of the sale deed on 17.10.2005. Though the informant paid such amount of Rs. 66,000/- and the date was fixed to 17.10.2005 for registration of the sale deed but on that day the appellant did not come up for registration on some plea for which a legal notice was sent to the appellant on 26.11.2005 by registered post which was received by the appellant on 28.11.2005. It is further stated in the F.I.R. that on 112005 at about 11.00 a.m. the informant along with two other gentlemen namely Bigneswar Sahoo (P.W.3) and Dibakar Mohapatra (P.W.6) came to the house of the appellant and requested him to execute the sale deed but the appellant and other co-accused persons being armed with weapons not only abused the informant in filthy language but came to attack him. The appellant attempted to deal a blow on the belly of the informant with a knife but due to intervention of P.W.3 and P.W.6, he was rescued. It is stated in the F.I.R. that the accused persons threatened the informant with dire consequences.

(3.) After submission of charge-sheet, the case was committed to the Court of Session after observing due committal procedure and the case was made over to the learned Trial Court for disposal in accordance with law where the learned trial Judge charged the appellant and co-accused persons on 29.02007 as aforesaid and since the appellant and the co-accused persons refuted the charges and pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, the Sessions trial procedure was resorted to prosecute them and establish their guilt.