Back
2021 Supreme(Ori) 142
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
Dr. S. Muralidhar, B.P. Routray, JJ.
Arjun Pangi - Appellant
Versus
State Of Odisha - Respondent
JCRLA No. 19 of 2011
Decided On : 25-10-2021
Mrs. C. Kasturi, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. J. Katikia, Additional Government Advocate, for the Respondent.
The judgment establishes the importance of credible eyewitness testimony, the admissibility of witness testimony not examined by the police, and the court's power to summon witnesses under Cr.P.C. Section 311.
Headnote:
MURDER - Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code (IPC) Section 302 - The judgment discusses the medical evidence, eyewitness accounts, admissibility of witness testimony, and the power of the court to summon witnesses under Cr.P.C. Section 311. The court rejected the appellant's argument for culpable homicide not amounting to murder, finding no provocation or self-defense. The appeal was dismissed.
Fact of the Case:
The Appellant was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for murdering his neighbor. The prosecution presented evidence of the assault and the medical cause of death, while the defense denied the charge and questioned the reliability of eyewitnesses.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the medical evidence and eyewitness accounts credible, rejecting the defense's arguments against the admissibility of witness testimony. The court also dismissed the appellant's argument for culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Issues: The issues included the reliability of eyewitness testimony, admissibility of witness testimony not examined by the police, and the applicability of exceptions under Section 300 of the IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the credibility of eyewitnesses, the power of the court to summon witnesses under Cr.P.C. Section 311, and the lack of provocation or self-defense in rejecting the appellant's argument for culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the seized material objects were ordered to be destroyed after four months.
JUDGMENT
B.P. Routray, J. The Appellant has been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for committing murder of his neighbour, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Malkangiri in Criminal Trial No.21 of 2010.
2. Prosecution case in brief is that, both Appellant and deceased were residents of village Haripur under Chitrakonda P.S. in the district of Malkangiri. On 29th November, 2009 in the morning at around 8 am when the Appellant in an angry mood was standing in front of the house of his sister-in-law Kamala Khilla holding a wooden mortar (Musala), the deceased who is a neighbour to the house of both Kamala Khilla and the Appellant, tried to persuade the Appellant to cool down, but he dealt blows on the head of the deceased by that wooden mortar causing bleeding injuries. The deceased died subsequently in the hospital.
3. The wife of the deceased namely, Gasu Sahu (P.W.1) lodged the F.I.R. (Ext.6). P.W.12, the then Sub-Inspector of Police, registered the F.I.R. as Chitrakonda P.S. Case No.22 dated 29th November, 2009 and took up investigation. He seized the mortar (M.O.I) from the spot on the same day and also arrested the Appellant. On the next day, he held inquest over the dead body and sent it for post mortem examination. P.W.11, the Surgeon of District Headquarters Hospital, Malkangiri conducted the autopsy and submitted his report under Ext. 4. The charge-sheet was submitted on 27th March, 2010 for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
4. The Appellant denied the charge and stated that he has been falsely implicated in this case.
5. Prosecution examined 13 witnesses in total and marked several documents as Exhibit-1 to Exhibit-12. The prosecution also produced 4 material objects as M.O. I to IV including the weapon of offence. On the other hand three witnesses have been examined by the defense, who are the Appellant himself (D.W.1), Kamala Khilla (D.W.2) and Chaitan Pangi (D.W.3). No documentary evidence has been adduced from the side of defense.
6. As per the medical evidence adduced through P.W.11 Dr. Sashi Bhusan Mohapatra, an Assistant Surgeon who conducted autopsy of the dead body on 1st December, 2009 found two lacerated wounds on the head of the deceased. The first one was of size 3' X 0.25' X 0.5' placed over the left temporal bone at 2.5' above the left ear. The second wound was of size 2.5' X 0.25' X 0.5' placed at 2' above the first injury on the left side on the head. On dissection he further found corresponding internal injuries of fracture of temporal skull and intracranial subdural hemorrhage of the brain. The cause of death is due to intracranial hemorrhage leading to cardio respiratory failure resulting shock and death. P.W.11 further opined that both the injuries are possible by the wooden mortar (M.O.I) produced before him for examination. Though the defense in cross examination has elicited from the mouth of P.W.11 that such injuries could be possible due to fall from the roof of a pucca house on a hard and rough surface, but he could not be successful to falsify the evidence of P.W.11. The reason being that, P.W.11 has explained that in case of fall there would be additional injuries and in the present case no other injuries are there and secondly, there is no mention of any pucca house or rough and hard surface by any of the witnesses. Thus the medical evidence adduced by the prosecution through P.W.11 cannot be doubted at all and as such it can safely be concluded that the deceased died homicidal nature of death.
7. Prosecution has presented several eye witnesses to the occurrence. As per prosecution P.W.1, the wife of the deceased and P.Ws.2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 10 all co-villagers, are the eye witnesses to the assault on the deceased. Amongst them P.Ws.4, 5 and 8 have turned hostile and did not support the prosecution case. P.W.1 admitted in her cross that by the time of her arrival at the spot the deceased had already fallen on the ground sustaining injuries. Si
