- (1.) This criminal appeal is directed against an order of conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the sentence of imprisonment for life passed by the learned Judge, Special Court (E.C. Act) cum Additional District and Sessions Judge, Durgapur in Sessions Trial No. 19 of 1997.
(2.) The prosecution case in short goes like this; On December 21st 1993 between 9.30/10 hours the accused Chunnu Hembram assaulted two Adivasi women with iron rod and sharp cutting weapon. Due to such assault the said two women suffered severe bleeding injuries and the same lead to their death. In the trial the appellant was charged under Sections 302/307/324 IPC and total 10 witnesses were examined from the side of the prosecution and defence examined none.
(3.) The PW/1 Anath Mondal did not support the prosecution case and was declared hostile. The PW/2 Budhan Murmu, son of one of the victim is a post occurrence witness. The PW/3 Jadu Murmu who is the son of the other victim is also a post occurrence witness which would be evident from his answer given in cross-examination where he admitted that he returned home at around 9/9.30 a.m. after hearing the news of assault of his mother by the appellant and one Hara Murmu informed about such facts. The PW/4 Kabilal Mandi was also declared hostile during the trial. Similarly PW/7 Manasa Murmu is a post occurrence witness who admitted in his cross-examination that he did not see the incident of assault on Bhuji and Sukhi, the two victims. The PW/8 is a doctor who issued the injury reports in respect of some of the villagers. The PW/9 is the Investigating Officer of the case and PW/10 is the police officer who finally submitted charge-sheet.;