HEMLAL GOUD Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant in this appeal assails the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge, Kalahandi at Nuapada passed in Sessions Case No. 70 of 1997 convicting him for commission of offence under Section 302, IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution as revealed from the record is that the Appellant and two other accused persons (since acquitted) were working as constables in APR Force, Nuapada. On the date of occurrence in between 11 P.M. and 2.00 P.M., they entered inside the premises of the liquor Bhati at Nuapada by scaling over the boundary wall to take liquor. The business of the Bhati was closed by then. After entering into the Bhati, they knocked at the window of the sales counter. At that point of time, the Manager of the Bhati, the Salesman and others were taking their food. The Salesman of the Bhati went to the counter, opened the window and found the three accused persons demanding liquor. The Salesman did not agree to supply liquor without payment, as a result of which all the three accused persons out of anger broke some of the empty beer bottles lying near the window. In the meantime, the Manager and one of the workers as well as the Salesman went out of the residential premises and found two of the accused persons catching hold of the hands of the deceased and another dealing a blow on the head of the deceased by means of an empty beer bottle, as a result of which the deceased fell down on the ground senseless with bleeding injury on his head. The deceased was thereafter taken to the verandah and after a vehicle was arranged he was shifted to the district headquarters hospital at Nuapada. In the hospital, he was declared dead. Thereafter, the FIR was lodged and on completion of the investigation charge sheet was submitted against all the three accused persons including the Appellant for commission of offence under Sections 302 and 34, IPC.

(3.) OUT of the eight witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution, the material witnesses are P. Ws.4, 5, 6 and 7. On the basis of the evidence of the three eye witnesses, namely, P. Ws.5, 6 and 7 and on consideration of the injury sustained by the deceased, as revealed from the evidence of P.W.4, the trial court convicted the Appellant alone for commission of offence under Section 302, IPC and acquitted the other two accused persons of the charges.