Judgment

VENKATARAMIAH, J. :- This appeal is filed against the judgment of the High Court of Orissa convicting the appellant of an offence under Section 302 I. P. C. and imposing the sentence of imprisonment for life after reversing the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge who tried the case. The prosecution alleged that the appellant had committed the murder of one Tanguru Behere at about 8.00 a. m. on January 31, 1969, by attacking him with an axe. The prosecution principally relied upon two pieces of evidence in support of its case, namely the evidence of two eye witnesses - Bhagabat (P. W. 1) and Rosani (P. W. 2) and the extra judicial confession said to have been made by the appellant before Markanda (P. W. 3) and Jatia (P. W. 5). They also relied upon two other circumstances, namely recovery of an axe (M. O. 1) on the basis of the statement made by the appellant and the bloodstains which were found on the clothes of the appellant. The learned Trial Judge disbelieved the evidence of P. Ws. 1 and 2 and found that it was not possible to record a conviction on the basis of the material relied on by the prosecution. Accordingly he acquitted the appellant. Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, the State Government took up the matter in appeal. The High Court, as stated earlier, reversed the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court and convicted the appellant of an offence punishable under Section 302, I. P. C. and imposed the sentence of imprisonment for life. We have been taken through the record by Shri Raghunath Singh who has appeared as an Amicus Curiae. We thank him for the assistance given by him in this case.

2. The incident in question, according to the prosecution, took place at about 8.00 a. in. on January 31, 1969, at a place which was near the village Talpada. P. Ws. 1, 2, 3 and 5 belong to the village Talpada. They all knew the deceased. The first information was given by P. W. 3 Markanda at about 4.00 p.m. on February 1, 1969. According to the first information, P. W. 3 came to know of the fact that the body of the deceased was lying at Jodi Daber a little away from his village from his son on the morning of February 1, 1969, and then after going to the place where the dead body was lying, he went to the police station and lodged the information at about 4.00 p.m. P. W. 3 stated before the police that he suspected the appellant as the person who was responsible for the unnatural death of the deceased as the appellant, who was a washerman had stated twice before that he was suffering because the deceased who was also a washerman washing the clothes of the villagers of Kanji Pani village which was his village. Curiously ever though he had no idea of the weapon that was used for killing the deceased, he stated in the first information that an axe which belonged to him was missing from his house for about 4 days. It may be stated here that the case of the prosecution is that the axe (M. O. 1) which was used in the commission of the offence belonged to P. W. 3. After the receipt of the first information the police went to the place of occurrence and examined some persons in the course of investigation. P. Ws. 1 and 2 were no doubt amongst the persons who were examined by the police P. W. 1 who stated before the Court that he had seen the appellant attacking the deceased with an axe in the morning of January 31, 1969, did not disclose that such an incident had taken place to anybody on that day. He further stated that he disclosed the facts relating to the occurrence to Baneswar Pradhan and Kandunia Pradhan in the morning of February 1, 1969. Baneswar Pradhan and Kandunia Pradhan have not been examined in this case. P. W. 2, Rosani is the wife of P. W. 3 Markanda who gave information to the police. She no doubt stated before the Court that she was present at the time of occurrence and saw the appellant attacking the deceased. She too did not disclose that such an incident h