Suppression of injuries on the accused persons creates doubt regarding the veracity of the prosecution case and probabilises the defense version of right of private defense.

P. K. MISRA, J.

( 1 ) THE appellant has been convicted under S. 302, IPC, and sentenced to imprisonment for life by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jaipur, in S. T. No. 48/3 of 1991.

( 2 ) THE appellant faced trial along with fourteen other accused persons who have been acquitted. The appellant was charged under S. 302, IPC, for having committed the murder of one Kasinath Naik. The acquitted accused persons Ananta Dalei, Arjuna Daloi, Basanta Jena, Sarat Jena, Suryamani Daloi, Bharat Daloi, Suria Daloi, Kapila Daloi and Sasadhar alias Ratha Palar stood charged under Ss. 148, 307 and 302/149, IPC, for having committed the murder of Kasinath Naik and Madhusudan Naik and for having attempted to commit the murder of Bake Daloi. They were also charged under S. 324/24, IPC, for voluntarily causing hurt to Lambodar and Babuli. The present appellant along with acquitted accused Rama Bohoera, Nanda Dalei, Purna Dalei and Sasadhar alias Ratha Palar were also charged under S. 120-B, IPC, for hatching conspiracy to commit the murder of Baka Dalei. Acquitted accused Purna Dalei, Ananta Dalei and Kapila Dalei were charged under S. 324/34, IPC, for voluntarily causing hurt to Lambodar Naik. The appellant along with acquitted accused Nanda Dalei stood charged under S. 324/34, IPC, for causing hurt to Babuli Bohoera. As already indicated, the appellant alone has been convicted under S. 302, IPC, and all other accused persons as well as the appellant have been acquitted of all other charges.

( 3 ) THE prosecution case, briefly stated, is as follows: Baka Dalei (P. W. 2) used to worship ' Mangala' deity. On 28-8-1990, some other persons not belonging to Daloi family of the village tried to forcibly worship the deity and resistance was offered by Baka Daloi. Hearing shouts, the informant and others came near the temple and the persons who were creating trouble left the place. Subsequently, conspiracy was hatched and the accused persons including appellant Gura Daloi came armed with iron rods, lathis, bow and arrows et cetera. Accused Gura Dalei struck an arrow which hit the chest of Kasinath Naik. When Madhusudan Naik tried to come to the rescue of Kasinath, accused Kapila Daloi, Nanda Dalei, Purna Dalei and Ananta Dalei assaulted him with lathi and iron rods. The informant and others removed injured Kasinath Naik and Madhusudan Naik from the spot. The former succumbed to the injury while the latter was removed to Jajpur Road Hospital from where he was taken to the S. C. B. Medical College, Cuttack, where he died of the head injury. Information was lodged by Lambodar Naik (P. W. 1) and on completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted.

( 4 ) THE plea of the accused persons was mainly one of denial. However, some of the accused persons including the appellant raised the question of right of private defence of person. Their case as revealed from the suggestion to the witnesses was that the informant's group had attacked some of the accused persons at their residence and to scare them away accused Gura Daloi had shot an arrow. The assault on Madhusudan was denied in toto by the accused persons.

( 5 ) THE prosecution examined 12 witnesses in support of its case of whom P. Ws. 1 to 5 are theeye-witnesses. P. W. 6 is the doctor who had examined some of the injured witnesses as well as four of the accused persons including the appellant who had been injured. P. Ws. 10 and 12 are the doctors who held past-mortem examination in respect of deceased Kasinath Naik and Madhusudan Naik respectively. P. W. 11 is the Investigating Officer. Other witnesses are formal witnesses.

( 6 ) THE trial Court has not accepted the prosecution case regarding the alleged conspiracy and has also not accepted the prosecution evidence relating to assault on Madhusudan, who died subsequently, and other members of the prosecution party and as such has acquitted all the accused persons of all the charges. The trial Court has recorded its doubt regarding the place of o