KANA @ GOURANGA PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the argument and the judgment is as follows.

(2.) RADHA Naik (P.W.1) is the grown up daughter of deceased Rumeswar Naik. Dhanmati is the mother of P.W.1. The occurrence of murder of Rumeswar Naik (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') took place in the night between 20th and 21st April; 1995. By that date Dhanmati was engaged in the business of vegetable vending as hawker. The accused was assisting her in such vegetable vending. Dhanmati proposed marriage of P.W.1 with the accused. That proposal was rejected by the deceased and P.W.1 supported the decision of her father. On the other hand the deceased arranged a groom for marriage of P.W.1 and that marriage was to be solemnized in the month of May, 1995. On the date of occurrence in the night at about 1.30 A.M. on hearing the shout of the deceased that the accused stabbed on his abdomen, his brother (P.W.3 -Satyananda Naik) and P.W.1 came upon the spot and saw the accused running away and in the process of chasing to catch the culprit, the deceased fell down on the Court -yard. Other persons in the village were called for help and the deceased in such serious injured condition was shifted for medical aid but he succumbed. The ASI of police (P.W.10) on receipt of the FIR (Ext.3) registered the case and undertook preliminary investigations while forwarding the FIR to the Police Station. P.W.12, the Investigating Officer from the Police Station undertook further investigation and P.W.11 Officer -in -Charge, Bhasma P.S. ultimately submitted charge -sheet. In course of investigation, inquest was held on the dead body of the deceased and it was sent for post -mortem examinations. The spot was visited and incriminating articles were seized together with the weapon of offence, i.e., knife (MO I) and the wearing apparels of the accused and the deceased. The seized articles suspecting to be containing blood were sent for chemical analysis and serological test in the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory at Sambalpur.

(3.) PROSECUTION examined 12 witnesses and relied on the documents marked Exts.1 to 14 besides material objects marked M.O. I to VIII. Accused did not adduce any evidence.