Back
1981 Supreme(Ori) 97
ORISSA HIGH COURT
P. K. MOHANTI AND B. K. BEHERA, JJ.
DAMU SANTA
VERSUS
THE STATE
Criminal Appeal No. 209 of 1978,
Decided on : 30 -9 -1981.
A person who intentionally inflicts an injury on another person with a heavy weapon, causing a fracture of the skull bones, is presumed to have intended to cause death or such bodily injury as is sufficient to cause death, unless there is evidence or explanation to the contrary.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 302, I.P.C. - INTENTION TO CAUSE DEATH - SUFFICIENT INJURY IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF NATURE TO CAUSE DEATH - CULPABLE HOMICIDE AMOUNTING TO MURDER - EVIDENCE OF EYE-WITNESSES - RELIABILITY - INTERESTED WITNESSES - CORROBORATION.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted of murder under Section 302, I.P.C. for causing the death of the deceased by inflicting a blow on his head with a piece of split-wood. The prosecution case was that the appellant and the deceased had an argument over liquor, and the appellant attacked the deceased with the split-wood, causing his death. The appellant denied the charges and claimed that he was falsely implicated.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellant had caused the death of the deceased with the intention of causing bodily injury sufficient to cause death. The court relied on the evidence of eyewitnesses who testified to seeing the appellant strike the deceased on the head with the split-wood, as well as the medical evidence which showed that the injury was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.
Issues: 1. Whether the appellant had the intention to cause death when he struck the deceased on the head with the split-wood. 2. Whether the injury inflicted by the appellant was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. 3. Whether the evidence of the eyewitnesses was reliable and could be relied upon to convict the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the appellant had the intention to cause death because he struck the deceased on the head with a heavy weapon, causing a fracture of the skull bones. The court noted that there was no evidence or explanation to suggest that the appellant did not intend to cause the injury or that his act was a regrettable accident. 2. The court held that the injury inflicted by the appellant was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, as evidenced by the medical evidence. 3. The court held that the evidence of the eyewitnesses was reliable and could be relied upon to convict the appellant, despite the fact that they were related to the deceased. The court noted that the eyewitnesses' evidence was corroborated by the medical evidence and the F.I.R. lodged shortly after the occurrence.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appellant's appeal and upheld his conviction for murder under Section 302, I.P.C.
JUDGEMENT
P. K. Mohanti, J. :- The appellant along with four others stood charged under S.147, I.P.C. for having formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object of causing the death of one Laxman Santa of village Katranguda under Tentulikhunti Police Station in the district of Koraput and also under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 149, I.P.C. for, having caused his death in prosecution of their common object. The appellant was separately charged under Sec. 302, I.P.C. After trial, the appellant was convicted under Sec. 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and the other accused persons were acquitted of the charges framed against them.
2. Prosecution case was that on 8-3-1978 morning P.W. 4 Dhana Santa and P.W. 5 Kamulu Santa who were the maternal uncles of the deceased went to his house to see his ailing son. At about noon, the deceased accompanied by P.Ws. 4, 5 and his brother Suna Santa (P.W. 1) went to the bank of the river Murana for taking both. On the other side of the river some Sundhis were illicitly distilling liquor. At the request of the deceased, the party went to the other side of the river for taking liquor. The deceased purchased two bottles of liquor and partook of the same with his companions. The appellant Damu Santa was also taking liquor at that place in the company of other accused persons. When he saw the deceased and his companions taking liquor, he asked the deceased to give him some liquor. The deceased said that he could not give any liquor as he had no money. Then the appellant tauntingly remarked that the deceased might go with him and take any quantity of liquor he liked to consume. There was exchange of some hot words between the two. Then the appellant left the place with his companions. The deceased after taking liquor proceeded towards the other side of the river. He was followed by his brother P.W. 1 and his maternal uncles P.Ws. 4 and 5. As soon as the deceased reached the sandy bed of the river after crossing the stream the appellant and the other accused persons suddenly appeared there and attacked the deceased. The appellant dealt a blow on the head of the deceased by means of a piece of split-wood as a result of which he fell down. The other accused persons gave him kicks and fist blows. Then all the accused persons ran away and a little later the deceased died at the spot.
F.I.R. was lodged by P.W. 1 on the same day at about 8. p.m. at Tentulikhunti police station which is 20 kilometers away from the spot. After due investigation, the police submitted charge-sheet against the appellant and the other accused persons as aforesaid.
3. At the trial, the appellant and the other accused persons denied the charges and pleaded innocence.
4. In order to establish the charges, prosecution examined eleven witnesses of whom P.Ws. 1, 4 and 5 were said to be eye-witnesses to the occurrence. The accused persons examined two defence witnesses. On a consideration of the evidence adduced by both the parties, the learned Sessions Judge held the appellant guilty and inflicted the sentence as indicated above.
5. Mr. H.B. Swain, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant contended that no reliance should be placed on the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 4 and 5 as they are interested witnesses being relations of the deceased and that their evidence having not been acted upon so far as the accused persons who have been acquitted are concerned, it could not be relied upon so far as the appellant is concerned. It was also contended that the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 4 and 5 is highly unreliable as they made contradictory statements regarding the number of blows alleged to have been inflicted by the appellant on the deceased.
6. There can be no doubt that the deceased died a homicidal death. Dr. Sachinandan Bose (P.W. 2) who conducted autopsy over the dead body of the deceased on 10-3-78 found the following external injuries :-
(1) A lacerated wound ½" x ½" on the right side of the head 2" a
