LAWS(ORI)-1997-7-3

BISHEK MOHANANDA Vs. STATE

Decided On July 14, 1997
BISHEK MOHANANDA Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal from Jail, Bishek Mohananda hereinafter referred to as 'the accused' calls in question legality of his conviction for commission of offence punishable under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'IPC'), and sentence of imprisonment for life as awarded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Titilagarh.

(2.) Prosecution case as unfolded during trial is as follows :On 17-6-1991 at about 4 p.m. in the afternoon Rajkumar Mahanand (P.W. 1) was ploughing his land along with his father Aswini Mahanand (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased'). All on a sudden the accused came there and objected to ploughing of the land by P.W. 1 and the deceased. Accused drove out the bullocks of P.W. 1 from the land. When P.W. 1 and the deceased objected, accused raised his spear with the intention to kill the deceased, and when the deceased warded off the spear with the stick which he was holding and was being used for driving of bullock at the time of ploughing, it hit head of the accused. Accused got enraged and threw the spear at the abdomen of the deceased as a result of which there was profuse bleeding. When the accused tried to take out the spear from the abdomen, P.W. 1 gave a blow on his head which resulted in causing bleeding injuries. Thereafter the accused fled away. Information was lodged at Bangomunda Police Station, and investigation was undertaken. Deceased who was then alive was removed to Bangomunda Additional Public Health Centre in an injured stage where he was examined. The spear which was sticking to the abdomen of the deceased was removed by making small operation. As his condition deteriorated he was removed to Titilagarh Government Hospital, and thereafter he was removed to District Head Quarters Hospital, Balabir where he ultimately succumbed to the injuries on 21-6-1991. During trial apart from P.W. 1. Arjun Mahannd (P.W. 2) and Darjee Mahanda (P.W. 3) were stated to be eye-witnesses. It was claimed that confession was made before P.W. 4 about the killing by the accused. Dying declaration was recorded by the doctor who was treating the deceased. He has been examined as P.W. 8.

(3.) The accused pleaded innocence.