JUDGMENT :

B. Panigrahi, J. - This appeal filed by the State calls in question the order of acquittal of all the respondents of the offence u/s 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC") and respondent Prasanna alias Santosh Kumar Panda of the offence u/s 302/109 IPC passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal, in S.T. Case No. 122-D of 1988.

2. The prosecution story, as described in course of the trial, is as follows :

Deceased Bidyut Bhusan Patnaik was working as a Plantation Assistant in the Analabarene Cashew Plantation operated by the Cashew Development Corporation of Orissa, While discharging his duties, he used to prevent theft of cashew-nuts from the plantation. Prior to the incident, he had also reported against the present respondents for committing theft of cashew-nuts. Respondent Santosh is alleged to have intervened and dissuaded the deceased from taking any action against the culprits, who belonged to the neighbouring villages, for committirig theft of cashew-nuts from the plantation. Thus, the respondents were inimical towards the deceased, as the latter had taken action in preventing them from committing theft of cashew-nuts. On the date of occurrence, i.e.,