JUDGMENT : P. Ray, J. - The present appellant was tried for committing offence u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Judge, Keonjhar found him guilty u/s 302, l.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life. Being aggrieved the appellant has filed the present appeal from jail. 2. The prosecution case, inter alia, is : The accused Durjodhan is distantly related to the deceased Bihari Sardar. The accused wanted to marry Binita, a daughter of the deceased and put vermilion on her forehead. The deceased objected to the same and also assaulted the accused at that time. At about 8 P.M. on May 17, 1992 the deceased was sleeping on a Khatia in the courtyard of his house. His son Rasananda was teaching his sisters Rina and Sailendri. His wife and another daughter Binita were present there. The accused stealthily entered into the courtyard with a knife and pierced it, into the left side of the body below the arm-pit of the deceased. Rasananda chased the accused. The deceased also followed him, but fell down after proceeding to some distance. Rasananda could not catch the accused. The deceased was carried back home. He ultimately succumbed to the injury. F.I.R. was lodged vith the local police station on the same night. The accused was not found in his house. Ultimately, he was arrested in the village Panposhi. On the basis of his statement the weapon of offence (M.O. I) was recovered from the back-yard of the house of his sister in the village Handibhanga. 3. The defence is of complete denial. From the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses it appears that the accused has taken the plea of false implication. 4. The prosecution has examined as many as eight witnesses to prove the charge. Out of the witnesses P.Ws. 1,2,3 and 5 are the eye-witnesses. P.W. 4 is the Medical Officer who conducted the post mortem examination and issued the post mortem Examination Report (Ext. 1). P.W. 6 is witness to the arrest of the accused and his statement leading to recovery of the weapon of offence and recovery thereof. P.W. 8 is the investigating officer. P.W. 7 is a post occurrence witness who went to the place of occurrence immediately after the incident and ultimately lodged the F.I.R. with the police. 5. 1). P.W. 6 is witness to the arrest of the accused and his statement leading to recovery of the weapon of offence and recovery thereof. P.W. 8 is the investigating officer. P.W. 7 is a post occurrence witness who went to the place of occurrence immediately after the incident and ultimately lodged the F.I.R. with the police. 5. All the said four eye-witnesses have narrated the incident and stated that all of them have seen the accused piercing his knife into the body of the deceased. There is uniformity in the evidence of the said four eye-witnesses. All of them have withstood the cross-examination creditably. The weapon of offence was recovered on the basis of the statement given by the accused. P.W. 6 has deposed that in his presence the accused gave the statement which led to the recovery of the weapon of offence. The chemical examination report also indicates that the weapon of offence contained blood stain of the same group as that of the deceased. The doctor (P.W. 1) has stated in his evidence that the injury found on the body of the deceased could be inflicted by the weapon of offence (M.O. I). The doctor's evidence also shows that the deceased died of the injury sustained by him. 6. Considering the materials on record it appears that the accused entered into the courtyard of the deceased with the intention of causing death to him. The defence has not offered any explanation for entering into the house of the deceased late evening with a weapon. 7. Trial court has considered all the materials on record. We do not find any material error in the assessment of evidence by the trial court. It also appears that all the ingredients of offence u/s 302, I.P.C. have been proved beyond reasonable doubt. 8. For the reasons aforesaid, we do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed. C.R. Pal, J. 9. I agree. Final Result : Dismissed