Back
2015 Supreme(Ori) 499
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA: CUTTACK
VINOD PRASAD AND S.K. SAHOO, JJ.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 253 OF 2010
(Date of Judgment : 24.03.2015)
From the judgment and order dated 01.05.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sambalpur in S.T. Case No.44/16 of 2004.
Pradip Sahoo … Appellant
Versus
State of Orissa … Respondent
For Appellant:M/s.Asim Amitav Das, Manoj Verma, P.R.SinghL.N.Rayatsingh,A.N.PatnaikA.K. Parida
For Respondent:Mr. Sk. Zafarulla(Addl.Standing Counsel)
For informant :Mr. Biswajit Nayak, B.R.Sahu
Headnote:1. PENAL CODE, 1860 - Secs. 302/34 - Conviction under - Appeal - Appreciation of evidence - Prosecution has established the previous political rivalry between the parties as the motive behind the commission of crime through the evidence of P.W. 7 and P..W. 9 - Evidence of P.W. 7 and P.W. 8 also gets corroboration from the evidence of P.W. 13 who has seen the appellant’s leaving in a Motor Cycle so also from the Medical evidence adduced by the prosecution through P.W. 16 - Impugned judgment and order of conviction of ‘SS’ and ‘T’ confirmed and ‘PS’ set aside - Direction issued.
2. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 - Sec. 313 - Object of the Section is to afford an opportunity to the accused personally to explain any circumstance appearing in the evidence against him at the trial - Examination of an accused is not a empty formality - The substance of accusation is brought to the notice of the accused by such examination.
3. EVIDENCE - Related witnesses - Related witnesses are not necessarily false witnesses - Unless their evidence suffers from serious infirmity or raises considerable doubt in the mind of the Court, it would not be proper to discard their evidence straight away - Further stated.
JUDGMENT
S.K.SAHOO, J. - The appellant in Criminal Appeal No.253 of 2010, namely Pradip Sahoo, appellants in Criminal Appeal No.302 of 2010, namely, Sanjib Sahoo and Tukun @ Premanananda Sahoo along with co-accused Munu Meher, Rajesh Sahu and Umesh Bagarty faced trial in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sambalpur in Sessions Trial No. 44/16 of 2004 for offences punishable under Sections 148, 302/149 Indian Penal Code and Sections 25 (a) and 27 (1) of Arms Act.
The learned trial Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 1.5.2010 acquitted the co-accused persons Munu Meher, Rajesh Sahu and Umesh Bagarty of all the charges. The appellants in both the appeals were also acquitted of the charge under Section 148 Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(a) and 27 (1) of Arms Act but they were found guilty under Section 302/34 Indian Penal Code and accordingly the learned trial Court convicted them of such offences and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- each under Section 302/34 IPC, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further R.I. for a period of one month each.
2. The prosecution case as per FIR lodged by Purandar Behera (P.W.7) is that on 20.1.2003 during the morning hours, the informant had been to Lapanga Bus Stand. At about 9 O’ clock, he found the appellants along with three others came in two motor cycles and took tiffin from the Tiffin Stall of Rajendra Sahu situated in Lapanga Bus Stand and thereafter left the place. At about 10 O’ clock, the brother of the informant namely Khirod Kumar Behera (hereafter the “deceased”) came on a Hero Honda Motor cycle and purchased fruits from the Fruits Stall of one Satish Kumar Gupta (P.W.3). The three appellants along with their three associates again came in two motor cycles to the bus stand being armed with sword, bhujali, gupti and revolver and all of a sudden they surrounded the deceased and attacked him. The persons present at the bus stand ran hither and thither. The deceased was brutally assaulted and the accused persons intimidated the persons present there by showing sword, bhujali, gupti and revolver. They threatened the shopkeepers to close down their shops. The shop keepers also ran away out of fear. The informant shouted for which the accused persons left the place on their motor cycles. The informant rushed near the deceased and found him lying on the ground with bleeding cut injuries on the arms, neck, face, head and chest. The informant shifted the deceased to Jharsuguda Hospital in a vehicle where the doctors declared him dead.
On the basis of such an FIR which was received at Rengali Police Outpost on 20.01.2003 at 11.30 a.m., station diary entry was made by P.W.22 Malaya Kishrore Nayak, Sub-Inspector of Police, Rengali Police Outpost who sent the written report of the informant (P.W.7) to the Officer-in-Charge, Katarabaga Police Station through special messenger for registration of the FIR. P.W.20 Subodh Kumar Mallick who was the Officer-in-charge of Katarabaga Police Station, on receipt of the written report registered Katarabaga P.S. Case No.11 of 2003 dated 20.1.2003 under Section 302/34 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act and took up investigation of the case and proceeded to the spot.
P.W.22 who initially visited the spot prior to the arrival of P.W.20, found one sixer revolver written on it as “Made in Japan” and four numbers of live cartridges of .38 bore and one fired bullet with Khokha (cap) and another cover of the sword lying at the spot which were seized by him under seizure list Ext.1 in presence of the witnesses. P.W.22 also examined the local shop keepers and other witnesses and informed the Scientific Officer to examine the spot. He collected sample earth and blood stained earth from the spot with the assistance of scientific team and seized the same in presence of the witnesses and prepared seizure list Ext.4/1. At that time P.W.20 reached at the spot and prepared spot map Ext.8. P.W
