STATE OF ORISSA Vs. G NARRAYAN MURTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants in the Criminal Appeal who are the respondents in the Government Appeal (to be described hereinafter as the appellants) stand convicted under section 323 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the Code), while being acquitted of the charge of murder alleged to have been committed in furtherance of their common intention with the acquitted co-accused G. Nagabhusan Rao, for voluntarily causing hurt to Bori Kandal Rao (to be described hereinafter as the deceasedT) on June 8, 1971, at Bandhugam in the district of Koraput, by the Court of Session which has accepted the case of the prosecution against them, while rejecting a part of the evidence against the acquitted co-accused, relying on the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 3, the witnesses to the occurrence, the dying declarations of the deceased made before P.Ws.7, 8 and 11 implicating the appellants and the evidence of the doctor (P.W. 12) who had conducted the autopsy and rejecting the plea of denial set up by the appellants and the evidence of the witnesses for the defence.

(2.) The State is in appeal against the order of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Judge in respect of the charge of murder and it has been contended that the offence would amount to culpable homicide not amounting to murder coming under the second part of section 304 of the Code. The learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the evidence did not warrant a conviction of the appellants for the commission of any offence and they were entitled to an acquittal.

(3.) The learned counsel for both the sides have taken us through the relevant evidence. The evidence of the doctor (P.W. 12) would show that the death of he deceased was homicidal in nature and the injury on the chest which could be caused by a fall or a lathi resulting in the internal injury to the lung had caused death owing to a shock and haemorrhage. We are at one with the learned trial Judge that P.Ws. 1 to 3 were witnesses of truth and their evidence against the two appellants is clear and consistent. As would appear from their evidence, - the appellant G. Narayan Murty caught hold of the deceased and the other appellant dealt a stick blow on the back of the deceased and then dealt fist blows and slaps on the deceased. It is not necessary to catalogue their evidence to details and reiterate the reasons given by the learned trial Judge while holding that the evidence of P.Ws 1 to 3 is worthy of credence.