The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in witness statements undermined the conviction, leading to its reversal.

JUDGMENT :

D. DASH, J.

1. The Appellants, by filing this Appeal, have called in question the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 4th May, 2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepur, in Sessions Case No. 39/29 of 2004 arising out of G.R. Case No.38 of 2004 corresponding to Birmaharajpur P.S. Case No.20 of 2004 in the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S.D.J.M.), Biramaharajpur.

The Appellants (accused persons) thereunder have been convicted for committing the offence under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC ’). Accordingly, each of them has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three (3) years for commission of the said offence.

2. PROSECUTION CASE:-

On 04.04.2004 around 3.30 p.m., one Madhusudan Kalta (P.W.2) lodged a written with the Officer-in-Charge (OIC-P.W.10) of Birmaharajpur Police Station (P.S.) stating therein that on that day, around 7.00 a.m., his younger brother, namely, Jadumani Kalta was ploughing the lands of the elder father, namely, Chandra Kalta. When he (P.W.2) had been to that land taking food for Jadumani, the accused persons arrived there and challenged him and Jadumani as to why they were ploughing those lands when Chandra Kalta had no share over the same. He (P.W.2) then replied that Chandra had his share over those lands and when Chandra had already adopted his son and had given those lands to his son in writing, they were ploughing the lands on that right. It was stated that being not satisfied with the answer, the accused persons started quarrelling with them and threatened to fight with them, if they would go on ploughing those lands. Being so threatened, the informant (P.W.2) and his younger brother Jadumani returned to their house when accused persons also left the place and proceeded towards the village. The informant, coming to his village, on the mid part of the village, his wife meet him and informed that the accused persons were assaulting Chandra Kalta under a banian tree at one end of the village. Madhusudan (informant-P.W.2) then rushed to the spot and saw the accused persons being armed with lathi were assaulting Chandra Kalta, who was then lying on the ground and shouting for help. At the sight of informant (P.W.2), the accused persons fled away and Chandra being shifted to the District Headquarters Hospital, Sonepur, succumbed to the injuries received by him on account of the attack from the side of the accused persons.

The written report, being received by the OIC (P.W.10), the same was treated as FIR (Ext.2) and upon registration of the case, the investigation was taken up.

3. The Investigating Officer (I.O.-P.W.10), in course of the investigation, examined the informant (P.W.2) and sent him for medical examination. The I.O. (P.W.10), having visited the spot, prepared the spot map (Ext.8). He (P.W.10) seized two Merhas lying near the spot under seizure list (Ext.1). On the next day of the occurrence, after getting information that Chadra is dead while undergoing treatment at DHQ Hospital, Sonepur, the I.O. (P.W.10) reached there and held inquest over the dead body in presence of the witnesses and prepared the report (Ext.3). He sent the dead body of Chandra for post mortem examination by issuing necessary requisition. The seized incriminating articles were sent for chemical examination through Court. On completion of investigation, the I.O. (P.W.10) submitted the Final Form placing these accused persons to face the Trial for commission of the offence under section 302/34 of the IPC .

4. Learned S.D.J.M., Birmaharajpur, on receipt of the Final Form, took cognizance