JUDGMENT

S.K. SAHOO, J.

It is a case of patricide. The appellant faced trial in the Court of learned 1st Adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Sundargarh in Sessions Trial No.4/2 of 2006 for offence punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code for committing murder of his father Prem Say Naik (hereafter the “deceased”) on 12.4.2005 at about 9 p.m. in village Pandridhipa. The learned trial Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 12.6.2006 held the appellant guilty under section 302 I.P.C. and accordingly convicted him of such offence and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life.

2. The prosecution case, as per the F.I.R. lodged by Bainu Naik (P.W.1) on 13.4.2005 before Inspector-in-charge, Town Police Station, Sundargarh was that he was staying with his family in village Pandridhipa. The appellant is the elder brother of the informant and they were remaining separately and both of them were also having two sisters. The appellant was working as a labourer and maintaining his family. The deceased was also working as a labourer and staying with his wife separately. The appellant used to quarrel with the deceased and the informant was trying to settle the dispute between them. On 12.4.2005 night at about 9 p.m. the informant had been to attend call of nature to the nearby tank embankment with his brother-in-law Narayan (P.W.3). While returning home, on the way, the informant found the appellant holding an axe and shouting to kill everybody who so ever dares to interfere him and so shouting he left from the side of the house of the deceased towards his house. At that time the mother of the appellant cried aloud saying repeatedly that the appellant had killed the deceased. The informant rushed back to the house and found the deceased lying dead in the courtyard with bleeding injuries. The mother of the appellant was telling that the appellant had killed the deceased by means of an axe. The informant noticed injury on the forehead of the deceased and at that time the deceased was making no response. The deceased was lifted from the ground and was placed on a cot and since he did not respond to the call, the informant became sure that the deceased was no more. The informant ran towards the nearby square of the village and informed Town police station over phone regarding the commission of murder of the deceased by the appellant and returned back home. It is further stated in the F.I.R. that on the date of occurrence some persons had come to see the daughter of the appellant for the purpose of marriage. After their departure, the deceased asked the appellant in the evening hours as to why he was not called when the parties had come to see his (appellant’s) daughter. Over this issue, a quarrel ensued between the appellant and the deceased which aggravated the hostile feeling and the appellant killed the deceased by an axe.

3. P.W.1 orally reported the matter which was reduced to writing by P.W.11 Sujit Kumar Sahoo, S.I. of Police, Town Police Station, Sundergarh at the spot. The report was sent to Town Police Station. On receipt of such FIR, P.W.10 Bishnu Charan Mishra, Inspector-in-Charge, Town Police Station, Sundargarh registered Town P.S. Case No.35 of 2005 dated 13.04.2005 under section 302 I.P.C. and took up investigation.

During course of investigation, P.W.10 visited the spot and prepared spot map Ext.13, examined the informant and other witnesses, seized blood stained earth, sample earth and one lamp at the spot under seizure list Ext.5. P.W.10 held inquest over the dead body vide inquest report Ext.3. He arrested the appellant and while in police custody, on the information of the appellant, the weapon of offence i.e., axe (M.O.I) was recovered from the house of the appellant under seizure list Ext.4, the blood stained dhoti of the appellant was also seized under seizure list Ext.6. The dead body was sent for post mortem examination to District Head Quarters Hospital, Sundargarh where P.W.12 Dr. Sarat Chandra Naik conducted po