GUPTA AMANATYA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the accused -Appellant is directed against the judgment dated 28.10.2002 passed by the Ad hoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Jeypore, in Criminal Trial No. 14 of 2002, holding the accused guilty of offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code & convicting him thereunder.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, on 31.01.2000 at about 4 P.M., the deceased Madhaba & Dhana (P.W.1) were sitting near the canal of the village Salpiaguda. At that time the accused came from the back side being armed with a broken portion of a ladder & at first dealt one blow on the back side neck of the deceased, as a result of which, the deceased fell down on the ground. Thereafter the accused dealt three to four blows on the head of the deceased causing severe bleeding injuries. Seeing the assault on the deceased, Dhana (P.W.l) raised hulla, as a result of which, P.W. 2, who is the brother of the deceased & P.W. 6 Raghu Pujari and Ors. rushed to the spot, while the accused was still assaulting the deceased. P.W. 2 snatched away the broken ladder from the hands of the accused. The victim was shifted to his house but soon after he succumbed to his injuries. The son of the deceased & P.W. 6 went to the Jeypore Sadar Police Station & lodged oral report at about 10 P.M. in the same night which was reduced to writing by the police & registered as an F.I.R. After investigation was completed, the police filed charge sheet against the accused under Section 302 Indian Penal Code.

(3.) THE prosecution in order to substantiate the charge examined 8 witnesses, out of which, P. Ws.1, 2 & 6 were eye -witnesses to the incident. P.W. 3 is the son of the deceased, who reached the spot soon after the incident & is also the informant & witness to the inquest. P.W. 4 is the seizure witness. P.W. 5 reached the spot soon after the incident & P.W. 7 is the doctor who conducted the post mortem examination. P.W. 8 is the I.O. The defence examined two witnesses, out of whom, D.W.1 is the son of the accused & D.W.2 is an independent witness & both the witnesses tried to prove the plea of insanity of the accused.