BIPIN NAYAK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above three appeals are directed against the judgment and order of the learned ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Athagarh in S. T. Case No. 287 of 2004. All the appellants stood trial for commission of offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'i. P. C. ')on the charge that they in furtherance of their common intention committed murder of one Golakha Pradhan. All the appellants also faced trial for committing offence under Section 323/34 I. P. C. on the allegation of causing voluntary hurt to Subasini pradhan, PW6, Akhaya Pradhan, PW9 and ajaya Pradhan, PW10. The trial Court in the impugned judgment found all the appellants guilty of charges under Section 302/ 323/34 of the I. P. C. and sentenced each one of them to suffer imprisonment for life for offence committed under Section 302 of the i. P. C. and further to suffer imprisonment for six months for their conviction under section 323 of the I. P. C. Hence these appeals filed by the six appellants.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on 14. 9. 2003 at about 9. 30 p. m. while PW9 (Informant and son of the deceased) along with the deceased were returning home from nuapatna Bazar, appellant Sanjay Rout and chhota @ Prakash Pradhan who were also returning from the market ahead of them, suddenly challenged the deceased in front of the house of appellants Sanjay Rout and the informant protested. In view of such protest by the informant, appellant Chhota and Sanjay caught hold of him and assaulted by slaps, kicks and fist blows. When the deceased intervened, there was hot exchange of words between them and hearing the hullah the other four appellants namely satyabadi, Bijaya, Bipin and Jitu being armed with iron rod, lathi, wooden Gaja and wooden Dhada came out from their respective houses and surrounded the informant and the deceased. Appellant Sanjay dealt a blow on the head of the informant by means of a lathi as a result of which he fell down sustaining bleeding injury on his head. Apprehending danger to life when the deceased tried to escape, all the appellants chased him and assaulted in front of the house of kulamani Jena by means of weapons they were carrying. As a result of such assault, the deceased fell down and shouted for water. PW6, the wife of the deceased and PW10 the other son of the deceased hearing the hullah came running near the deceased but they were also assaulted by the appellants. PW6 shouted for water and by the time wife of Kulamani Jena gave water to the deceased, he had already died. Soon after the incident, P W15 came to the spot and shifted the informant to Bindhanima hospital, got him treated and returned to the spot. On the same date at about 0. 45 a. m. , the O. I. C. , tigiria P. S. , PW20 along with his staff were on patrolling duty at Nuapatna Bazar and received information about the incident. They rushed the village of occurrence at about 1. 00 a. m. in the night and found the dead body of the deceased lying in front of the house of Kulamani Jena. At the spot pw20 received the written report from PW9 having been scribed by PW15 and treated the same as F. I. R. Thereafter investigation was taken up and charge-sheet was submitted for commission of offences as stated earlier. The injured persons were treated on police requisition.

(3.) THE prosecution in order to prove the charges examined as many as 21 witnesses and one witness was examined on behalf of the defence. The witness examined on behalf of the defence is appellant Satyabadi rout himself. Out of 21 witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution, PW. 9 is the son of the deceased who had lodged the information and had accompanied the deceased from the market. PW6 is the widow of the deceased and PW10 is the other son of the deceased who rushed to the spot after hearing hullah and were also assaulted. All the three witnesses were examined as eyewitnesses to the occurrence. PWs1 and 2 were also examined as eyewitnesses to the occurrence but they turned hostile. PWs 3 and 5 are post occurrence witnesses and PW4 is the Amin who prepared the spot map. PWs 7 and 8 are the witnesses to seizure and pw12 is a witness to inquest and seizure. PWs 13 and 14 are Constables who are also witnesses to seizure. PW15 is the local sarpanch who scribed the F. I. R. and is also a witness to the inquest. PWsl6 and 17 are the two Doctors who medically examined accused Satyabadi and Prakash. PW18 is the Doctor who conducted the post mortem examination. PW19 is the District Scientific officer and PW20 is the 10. PW21 is the doctor who had examined the injured witnesses. The trial Court on the basis of the evidence of PWs 6,9 and 10 coupled with the evidence of PWsl8 and 21 found all the appellants guilty of the charges and convicted them thereunder.