SAHADEV NAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant challenges the order of his conviction under Section 302, IPC and sentence of imprisonment for life as per the impugned judgment of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bargarh in Sessions Trial No. 165/44 of 1994.

(2.) PROSECUTION case in substance is that Baladhar Majhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') had some dispute with one Sukadev Majhi. Accused -appellant, Sahadev Nayak is the son -in -law of that Sukadev Majhi. The deceased was done to death at about 4.30 to 5.00 P.M. on 20.7.1994 when he was taking rest in the house of Baratu Pradhan (P.W. 1) along with Amruta Pradhan (P.W. 3). Amruta Pradhan is the younger brother of Baratu Pradhan. According to the prosecution case, the accused came into the room where the deceased and P.W. 3 were taking rest. Then the deceased was in slumber and P.W. 3 was in awaken condition. Accused dealt blows by the help of the axe, which he was carrying. One of such blows was on the right side neck of the deceased causing his instantaneous death at the spot. P.W. 3 shouted for help, but the accused after dealing the blows fled away. Thereafter, he intimated the fact to the Choukidar in the neighbouring village, but did not go to the Police Station in the absence of his elder brother, i.e., P.W. 1. On the following morning when P.W. 1 arrived at the village, P.W. 3 narrated the incident to him, whereafter P.W. 1 went to Atabira Police Station and lodged the report orally which was reduced to writing and treated as FIR (Ext. 1). Police immediately took up investigation. In course of investigation, inquest was held over the dead body of the deceased and the same was sent for postmortem examination, witnesses were examined and their statements recorded, incriminating articles were seized, accused was arrested and the blood stained and sample articles were sent for chemical analysis and serological test to the State Forensic Science Laboratory (in short 'S.F.S.L.'). On completion of investigation, charge -sheet was submitted. After receipt of the charge -sheet, Learned SDJM, Bargarh committed the case to the Court of Session and Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bargarh thereafter took up the trial. Charge was framed under one head for the offence under Section 302, IPC.

(3.) ACCUSED took the plea of complete denial, but adduced no defence evidence.