DUSMANTA SETHY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA
LAWS(ORI)-2020-2-13
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Decided on February 13,2020

Dusmanta Sethy Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

A.K.MISHRA,J. - (1.) This is an appeal U/s.383 of the Cr.P.C . preferred by the appellant-convict against the conviction U/s.302 of the Indian Penal Code ( in short 'the I.P.C .') and sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand), in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 (three) years vide judgment passed in S.T. Case No.2/4 of 2006 dated 19.12.2006 passed by the learned Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Champua, Keonjhar.
(2.) Prosecution case, in short, is that on 1.8.2005 at about 6 P.M. in village Roida Camp, the accused dealt 'Dauli' blows to the deceased causing bleeding injuries. The informant-son along with others on being informed took the deceased to hospital but he was declared dead. On that night written F.I.R. was lodged resulting registration of Barbil P.S. Case No.174 dated 2.8.2005. Investigation was ensued. The accused was found in the village. He was arrested with 'Dauli' and one knife. The inquest over the dead body was made. Post-mortem (vide Ext.6) was conducted by Dr. N. Mahunta, he was expired on 23.08.2005. P.W.8-Dr. A.K. Dash gave opinion that the injuries found could be caused by the seized "Dauli". The Investigating Officer had sent all those seized articles including that "Dauli" for Chemical Examination to S.F.S.L., Rasulgarh under Ext.13 but no report was exhibited. The statement of one independent witness-P.W.7 was recorded U/s.164 of the Cr.P.C . vide Ext-5 being sponsored by the Investigating Officer. After completion of investigation, P.W.9- Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet. Basing upon which cognizance was taken by the learned JMFC, Barbil. The case was committed to the Court of Session. Accused faced trial for offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C.
(3.) In the trial, the accused took the plea of denial as well as insanity U/s. 84 of the IPC . The prosecution examined nine witnesses in all. Defence examined none. P.W.1 is the informant whose brother and mother are P.W.3 and P.W.6. P.W.4 is the witness to the seizure and inquest. P.W.5 is a witness to the seizure. P.W.2, a post-occurrence witness, is declared hostile. P.W.7 is an eye-witness. P.W.8 as stated above a Doctor who has not conducted post-mortem but proved the port-mortem report-Ext.6. P.W.9 is the Investigating Officer. The F.I.R., Inquest Report, Spot Map, statement U/s.164 of Cr.P.C . etc. are exhibited vide Exts.1 to 12. But what is not exhibited is the report of the Chemical Examination from S.F.S.L. The seized weapon of offence 'Dauli' was also not produced during trial.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.