To sustain a conviction under Section 307 IPC, the prosecution must prove intent or knowledge to endanger life, which was not established in this case, resulting in an altered conviction to Section 325 IPC.

JUDGMENT :

S.S. Mishra, J.

The present Criminal Appeal, filed by the appellants are directed against the judgment and order dated 12.08.1994 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Balangir in Sessions Case No.40/20 of 1994, whereby the appellants have been convicted for the offence under Section 307/34 of I.P.C. and on that count, they are sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.100/- each, in default, to undergo R.I. for one month each.

2. Heard Mr. D.P. Dhal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. Sarathi Jyoti Mohanty, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

3. During pendency of the present appeal, the Appellant no.2- Raghaba Pradhan expired. Therefore, vide order dated 24.04.2023, the appeal qua the deceased-appellant No.2 stood abated in absence of any application under Section 394 Cr.P.C. moved by his legal heirs or next friend. Accordingly, consideration of the present appeal is confined to the appellant No.1 only.

4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 14.04.1993 at about 10.45 p.m., an F.I.R. was lodged by one Biswanath Swain (P.W.1), the Manager of Ramai Talkies, Balangir. The report was recorded at the spot at about 11.05 p.m. It was alleged that at about 10.45 p.m. in the night, while the informant was busy in keeping the cash in the almirah of up- stair of Ramai Talkies, he heard hulla 'Polai Chalo, Polai Chalo' of the visitors in the cinema hall premises. On hearing the commotion, he came down to his office room and, through the window, saw two persons assaulting a man lying near the left-side main gate with bhujalis, delivering blows on his head, face, legs, and other parts of the body. He attempted to inform the Police Station over telephone but received no response. At that moment, someone shouted “Police, Police.” The informant then came down to the ground floor and found the injured person with multiple bleeding injuries.

Upon inquiry at the spot, the injured disclosed his name and identified the accused persons as his assailants. He further stated that they had assaulted him on various parts of his body with the intention to kill him due to prior enmity. The informant thereafter sent one staff member, Netrananda, to the Police Station for assistance. Upon the arrival of the police, he handed over the written report (Ext.1) to them.

P.W.5, the Sub-Inspector of Town P.S., Balangir, treated the report as the F.I.R. and, since it disclosed a cognizable offence, took up the investigation. He inspected the spot, examined witnesses, sent the injured for medical examination, and seized various incriminating articles including a bhujali cover recovered from the spot and the blood-stained clothes of the injured from the hospital. Observing the deteriorating condition of the injured, he also requested the Medical Officer to record his dying declaration. He further seized the wearing apparels of accused Madhusudan Padhan (Appellant No.1). Upon his transfer, the charge of investigation was handed over to S.I. B. Badi on 19.05.1993.

Subsequently, P.W.6 took charge of the investigation on 11.07.1993, sent the seized materials for chemical examination, and seized the bed-head ticket of the injured. After completing the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons under Section 307/34 IPC. On the basis of the police report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., the learned trial Court framed charges under Section 307/34 of I.P.C., to which the accused persons pleaded not guilty and faced trial.

5. The prosecution in order to prove its case examined seven witnesses. P.W.1 is the informant. P.W.2, the brother o