B. L. HANSARIA, J.

( 1 ) PROMOD Kumar Jena was involved in a number of cases u/s. 395, IPC. He was admittedly taken into custody on the night between 11th and 12/08/1990, though, according to the petitioner, the arrest was on 10th August. He was thereafter brought to Kendrapara Police Station and was said to have been released from that police station on 15-8-1990, which is denied by the petitioner. Thereafter, he was again taken into custody in connection with some other cases u/s, 395, IPC on the night between 22nd and 23/08/1990 and brought to Jajpur Road Police Station on 23-8-1990 at 9-00 a. m. The petitioner's case is that on 24/08/1990, he was informed by the police staff of Kendrapara that his son (Pramod) had committed suicide in police station of Jajpur Road. According to the petitioner, however, his son was intentionally murdered in the police station and his dead body was reduced to ashes despite his protest after refusing handing over of the dead body to him, The case of the opposite parties, however, is that Pramod committed suicide on the morning of 24th at about 5-15 a. m. by hanging himself by means of a rope which was prepared from the lace of his wearing lungi, by tying the rope at the iron bar of the skylight inside the latrine.

( 2 ) A magisterial inquiry in the matter was held and as per the report of the Subdivisional Magistrate (S. D. M.), Jajpur, the death of Promod had been caused "due to-suicidal hanging". The report is dated 29-1-1992.

( 3 ) SHRI Kanungo appearing for the petitioner submits that the finding of the S. D. M. is belied by certain important features which have been mentioned in the post-mortem report dated 24-8-1990, a copy of which has been enclosed along with the report of the S. D. M.

( 4 ) THE first submission made by Shri Kanunga in this regard is that the finding of 300c. c. of partially digested food matters in the stomach of the deceased as noted in col. 4 of Part IV of the report dealing with 'abdomen' would belie the case of the opposite parties that the death had taken place around 5. 15 a. m. of 24th August. This submission has been made because station diary entry No. 587, whose copy is also available with the report, states that the deceased was fed with rice and dal at the rate of Rs. 2/- at 9. 00 p. m. The learned counsel submits that if Pramod had taken his last meal at 9. 00 p. m. , by 5. 15 a. m. the entire food taken by him would have been digested fully and the autopsy surgeon would not have found 300 c. c. of partially digested food in his stomach. In this connection, our attention has been invited to 12th Edition of Samson Wright's "applied Physiology", at page 416 of which it has been stated that "with a meal of gruel the stomach is usually empty in about 2 1/2 hours. With the heavier and more solid barium meal, the stomach should be completely empty within 6 hours at the longest. " Reference is also made to what has been stated in paragraph 18 of Charan Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1975 SC 246 : (1974 Cri LJ 1253), in which it was stated that "normally a vegetable diet containing mostly farinaceous food (which means consisting of cereals-added by us)as usually taken by an Indian does not leave the stomach completely empty within six to seven hours after its ingestion ". Shri Kanungo then draws our attention to the 21st Edition of Modi's above treatise, at page 185 of which it has been stated that the rate of emptying of stomach varies in man from 2. 5-6 hours. The learned author has, however, stated in that page that sometimes emptying of stomach remains in abeyance for a long time in state of profound shock and coma. This had happened when soon after the meal, the person concerned had received severe head injuries and died within 12-24 hours afterwards. In one case the food consisting chiefly of rice and dal (as was in the present case) remained in the stomach for about 48 hours without undergoing digestion. But then, this happens in cases of profound shock