The prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, especially when relying on a solitary witness, and inconsistencies weaken the case.

JUDGMENT :

D.Dash, J.

The Appellant, by filing this Appeal, has called in question the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29th November, 2017 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Baripada, District-Mayurbhanj in S.T. Case No.19/79 of 2013 arising out of G.R. Case No.236 of 2012 (C.T. No.946 of 12) corresponding to Udala P.S. Case No.80 of 2012 in the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S.D.J.M.), Udala.

The Appellant (accused) thereunder has been convicted for committing the offence under section 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’). Accordingly, he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) in default to undergo. Rigorous imprisonment for one (1) year for commission of the said offence.

It is pertinent to mention here that along with this accused Badu Hembram @ Badhu Hembram, two other accused persons, namely, Raghu Hembram & Pitho Hembram, had faced the trial. The Trial Court, while acquitted Raghua and Pitho of the charges under section 302/34 of IPC, has convicted this accused under section 302 of the IPC and sentenced him as aforesaid.

2. PROSECUTION CASE:-

On 30.08.2012 around 12.05 a.m., one Ruibari Hembram, wife of Guruva Hembram of Village-Jamdiha under the jurisdiction of Udala Police Station (P.S.) in the District of Mayurbhanj presented a written report, being scribed by one Abdhan Soren (P.W.7) before the Inspector-in-Charge (I.I.C.) of Udala P.S. stating therein that in the evening of 29.08.2012 around 6.00 p.m. her husband, namely, Guruva Hembram was sleeping under tamarind tree when she (Informant-P.W.6) was cooking food. At that time, this accused with Pitho Hembram & Raghua Hembram of their village (since acquitted) suddenly made their entry into their courtyard. Then, they attacked Guruva by giving first blows and kicks and lifted him towards the entrance gate of their courtyard. Seeing the incident, when Ruibari (Informant- P.W.6) went to save her husband (Guruva), she could not succeed and fell on the ground. It is further stated that this accused (Badu) and others were challenging Guruva as he had grabbed all the lands without giving any share to them. They then made Guruva lie flat on the village road adjoining the entrance gate (Tati) to Tati and thereafter when Raghu caughthold of the hands of Guruva, this accused, bringing a sharp age Katuri, cut the throat of Guruva. Ruibari (Informant-P.W.6), having tried her best to save the life of her husband, failed in that attempt and on account of profuse bleeding, her husband (Guruva) died at the spot. Hearing hullah, the villagers such as Dakhin Hembram when and his mother Joba Hembram came running to the spot this accused and two others escaped. When Ruibari (Informant-P.W.6) was crying, other villagers arrived at the spot and before them Ruibari narrated the incident.

The above written report, being received by the I.I.C., Udala P.S., he treated the same as FIR (Ext.4) and upon registration of the criminal case, took up the investigation of the case.

3. The Investigating Officer (I.O.-P.W.16), in course of the investigation, examined the Informant (P.W.6). He (P.W.16), having proceeded to the spot at night, could not make the spot visit for which he waited there and intimated about the incident to the Superintendent of Police, Mayurbhanj and sent a requisition to the scientific team for collection of clues. He (P.W.16) visited the along with the Informant (P.W.6) and prepared the spot map (Ext.17). Thereafter, the I.O. (P.W.16) held inquest over the dead body of Gurva and prepared the report to that effect (Ext.1). The I.O.