LAWS(ORI)-2018-2-76

LADU MUNDA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

Decided On February 02, 2018
Ladu Munda Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 27.06.2012 passed by the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Keonjhar in S.T. Case No. 20/25 of 2012 convicting the appellant under Section 304, Part-II of the Indian Penal Code(hereinafter referred to as the "I.P.C.") and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to further R.I. for three months.

(2.) The F.I.R. was lodged by the informant, who is the son of the accused and the deceased that on 02.11.2011 at about 8.00 A.M. when he was in the field reaping crops, he heard large shouts from his house and rushing back home he found his father and mother had a quarrel and assault and his mother was sleeping on the cot. His father was administering water to his mother and asked him to arrange a vehicle. He searched for a vehicle but could not arrange and coming back home found his mother dead. He further alleged in the F.I.R. That due to assault on his mother by his father by means of a stick his mother expired. Pursuant to the F.I.R. Harichandanpur P.S. Case No. 62 of 2011 was registered under Section 302, I.P.C. and the investigation was taken up. In course of investigation, inquest and post-mortem were conducted, the witnesses were examined, one Bamboo stick, the alleged weapon of offence, was seized and sent for doctor's opinion as well as for forensic opinion, the accused was arrested and after completion of investigation, charge-sheet under Section 302,I.P.C. was filed against the accused-appellant. On commitment to the court of Sessions, the charge was framed accordingly to which the accused pleaded not guilty and the trial was conducted, in course of which, ten witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution as against none preferred by the accused in defence. The accused in his statement recorded under section 313 if the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 simply denied the allegations.

(3.) After detailed analysis of the materials placed before the court, the learned Trial Court came to the conclusion that the death of the deceased was homicidal in nature and it was caused due to the assault made by the present appellant. However, considering the circumstances, the learned Trial Court observed that the offence under Section 302, I.P.C. was made out and the offence under Section 304, Part-II, I.P.C. was well established against the accused-appellant. Accordingly, the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence was passed against the accused-appellant.