SANTOSH KUMAR PATRA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT challenges the order of conviction under Section 302, IPC passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Baripada in S.T. Case No. 4/178 of 999/96, arising out of G.R. Case No. 616 of 1996 of the Court of S.D.J.M., Baripada.

(2.) IT is alleged by the prosecution that on 6.7.1996 while Khetramohan Dwari (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') was engaged in cultivation operation, at about 12.30 p.m. accused came and dealt two successive blows on the blunt side of an axe causing bleeding injuries on the backside of the head of the deceased. After inflicting the injuries Appellant fled away, but the eye witnesses namely Gangadhar Barik (P.W.1) and Kalia Marandi (P.W.4) together with the post -occurrence witnesses namely Dilip Kumar Behera (P.W.2), Jogesh Chandra Pradhan (P.W.3) and Bibakananda Naik (P.W.5) brought the deceased in an injured condition to the village, got him treated by a private medical practitioner Dr. P.C. Mohapatra (P.W.10) in the occurrence village namely Kumbharmundakata and on his advice shifted the deceased to the district headquarters hospital at Baripada. In the said hospital, after attending to the deceased, Dr. Bhabani Shankar Mishra (P.W.12) advised to take the deceased to S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack, but P.W.11 - Hiralal Dwari, son of the deceased together with the other relatives took the deceased to Jamshedpur for treatment in the Tata Main Hospital. Dr. R. Wagji (P.W.7) from that hospital produced the Treatment File, Ext. 3 relating to the deceased and proved different entries made by the treating physician and the Death Report, Ext. 3/3. On police requisition, Dr. Y. Nath, Associate Professor of Forensic Department, M.G.M. Medical College, Jamshedpur (P.W.13) conducted post mortem examination and proved the Post mortem Report, Ext. 11. In the meantime, i.e. after the deceased was taken to the house and thereafter to the Baripada hospital, P.W.1 went and lodged oral report at the police station, and on the basis of the same P.S. Case was registered against the Appellant for the assault. On 9.7.1996 the deceased succumbed at 7.05 a.m. while at Tata Main Hospital, and on getting that information the case was converted to one under Section 302, IPC.

(3.) TO substantiate the charge, prosecution examined fourteen witnesses and relied on documents marked Exts. 1 to 18 besides exhibiting the wearing apparels and the weapon of offence, etc. as M.Os. -I to V. Besides examining the aforesaid eye witnesses and the post -occurrence witnesses, prosecution also relied on the recovery made under Section 27 of the Evidence Act under Seizure List, Ext. 5 and the statement of the accused, Ext. 4 leading to that discovery. While denying to the charge, as stated above, accused also advanced the plea that the deceased being an old man aged about 80 years, he suffered the death due to fall on the ridge by hitting against a stone and not because of the assault by the Appellant and that, there is land dispute and enmity between the deceased and the accused family. In furtherance of that defence plea, he examined two witnesses as D.Ws. 1 and 2. Amongst them D.W.2 is the father of the Appellant. Appellant also relied on the certified copy of the Judgment in G.R. Case No. 813 of 1995 and that was marked Ext. A.