The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; appellate review requires solid evidence to uphold conviction, especially regarding armed dacoity and trespass.

JUDGMENT :

SIBO SANKAR MISHRA, J.

The present Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 7^th of August 1990 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balasore in S.T. Case No.91 of 1984. By the said judgment, the learned trial Court found the appellants guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 395 and 457 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years for offence U/s.395 of the Indian Penal Code and further R.I. for 6 months for offence under Section 457 of IPC. All substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. Vide order of this Court dated 01.07.2025, the appeal stood abated qua appellant no. 3, he having expired in the year 2017. During hearing of the present appeal, when the judgment was reserved, learned counsel for the State submitted that appellant no. 2, Benguli @ Surendra Tripathy, had also expired on 14.09.2020. Consequently, in the absence of any application under Section 394 Cr.P.C. filed by their legal heirs or next friends, the appeal stands abated insofar as appellant nos. 2 and 3 are concerned. As regards appellant nos. 1, 4, 5 and 6, they are stated to be alive. The report and the death certificates have been taken on record.

3. Heard Ms. Ananya Mishra, learned Advocate for the appellants and Mr. Raj Bhusan Dash, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

Brief Facts of the Case

4. Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is that after taking dinner on the night of 12.10.1982, the members of the family of Jagabandhu retired to bed. The family members present in the house were: Puspalata Mishra (P.W.1), wife of Jagabandhu; Bijay Mishra (P.W.2), son of Jagabandhu; Pakan Mishra (P.W.3), daughter-in-law of Jagabandhu; Ajay Mishra (P.W.7), another son of Jagabandhu; and one Santosh Mishra, brother of Ajay Mishra. Jagabandhu slept in his bedroom, while Puspalata slept in the passage room leading to the backyard (badi). P.W.2 Bijay, P.W.7 Ajay and Santosh slept in another bedroom, and P.W.3 Pakan slept in her own room.

At about 10:00 p.m., P.W.1 Puspalata and P.W.7 Ajay heard knocking at the badi door. When Puspalata enquired about the identity of the caller, the response came from accused Bhabagrahi Panda, who identified himself as “Manus.” Both Puspalata and Ajay recognised his voice. On being questioned as to the purpose of his presence, accused Bhaba stated that they had come to take Rs. 500/- for consuming liquor. Immediately thereafter, Bhabagrahi Panda and his associates broke open the badi door and entered the house, armed with deadly weapons and carrying torch lights.

The prosecution further asserts that some of the accused assaulted Puspalata, and Jagabandhu was forcibly tied to a pole fixed in the courtyard. When P.W.2 Bijay protested, one of the accused dealt a knife blow on the left side of his chest, causing a bleeding injury. It is also alleged that the accused persons forcibly removed the earrings and necklace worn by Puspalata. When they attempted to snatch the earrings of P.W.3 Pakan, she pleaded with them not to touch her, stating that she would voluntarily hand over her ornaments, which she then did.

Thereafter, the accused persons allegedly confined all the inmates, including Jagabandhu, in a bedroom and proceeded to break open trunks and boxes kept in various rooms, removing gold and silver ornaments, clothes, utensils and other household articles. Some of the accused persons also broke open the granary and removed