BHAGA GOUDA @ VAINRA Vs. STATE
LAWS(ORI)-1988-6-11
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Decided on June 28,1988

Bhaga Gouda @ Vainra Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

RAHIM BEG V. STATE OF U.P. [REFERRED TO]
UGAR AHIR VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
BADRI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
LAKSHMI SINGH VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
HERAMBA BRAHMA VS. STATE OF ASSAM [REFERRED TO]
HARUN TIRKEY VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

KALI CHARAN GOUDA AND ORS. VS. TARA SANKAR ACHARYA AND ORS. [LAWS(ORI)-1989-10-13] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

A.K. Padhi, J. - (1.)THE Appellant challenges the conviction passed under Section 302 I.P.C. by the, Sessions Judge, Kalahandi in Sessions Case No. 48 of 1982 sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life.
(2.)THE prosecution case as narrated is:
On 13.10.1981 at about 10.00 A.M. one Kendu Gauda (P.W. 2) had gone to Gopalpur to purchase rice and while returning home, on the way saw the present Appellant Bhaga Gouda and Dhanu Gouda (since acquitted) quarrelling with Saiba Gouda, the deceased. Bhaga Gouda (Appellant) was armed with a 'Tangia' and accused Dhanu with a Lathi. Bhaga inflicted two blows with the Tangia on the head of the deceased and accused Dhanu gave lathi blows to the deceased. On seeing the incident P.W. 2 - came home and informed P.W. 1, the brother of the deceased regarding the incident. On getting the information from P.W. 2, P.W. 1 went to the place of assault and found the deceased lying dead in a nearby Pani Nala. As by the time P.W. 1 found the dead body it was already dark, the information was lodged on the next day i.e. 14.10.1981. The written information lodged by P.W. 1 was scribed by P.W. 3 and on completion of the investigation, charge sheet was submitted under Section 302/34 I.P.C. against the present Appellant and one Dhanu Gouda. Dhanu Gauda has been acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge.

The prosecution, to prove its case has examined nine witness. P.W. 1, the informant is the brother of the deceased. P.W. 2 is the only eye witness to the occurrence and he had informed P.W. 1 regarding the murder. P.W. 3 is the scribe of Ext. 1, the first information report and claims that both the accused persons made extra -judicial confessions before him. P.W. 4 is the witness who speaks about the discover of the axe (M.O. I), the weapon of offence, which was discovered (Tangia) on information given by the Appellant. P.W. 5 is the doctor who conducted the post -mortem. P.W. 6 is the Constable who accompanied the dead body and P.W. 7 is the witness to the inquest as well as the discovery of M.O. I, the axe, P.W. 8 is the witness regarding the extra judicial confession and P.W. 9 is the Investigating Officer.

(3.)THE learned Sessions Judge has given the findings:
(a) the death of the deceased was homicidal;

(b) P.W. 2 the only eye witness, though, implicates Dhanu Gouda in his examination in chief, has stated in the cross -examination that he has only seen the assault given by Bhaga Gouda and none else on the deceased and there being no other material against Dhanu Gauda. Dhanu Gouda is not guilty and is to be acquitted.

(c) Bhaga Gouda has committed the murder of the deceased.



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