JUDGMENT : B. Panigrahi, J. - This appeal is directed against the judgment order passed is the learned Sessions Judge. Korapui at Jeypore convicting the Appellant u/s 302. IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life, in Sessions Case No. 15 of 1994. 2. The prosecution case in brief is as follows: On 18.1.1994 at about 11.00 P.M. the Appellant came to the house of the deceased Sania Challan and asked him to accompany him to take 'Salap' (Country liquor). When the deceased did not acceded to the Appellant's request he forcibly dragged him from the house. At that juncture, when Manguli Challan (P.W.5) the wife of the deceased protested, the Appellant's high-handed action, immediately the Appellant took out a knife an gave a stab blow to her as a result of which one was forced to move a little. In the process the deceased was dragged outside his house. The Appellant thereafter gave knife blows on his chest for which he instantaneously died. 3 P.W.5, Manguli Challan since was injured, could not invite any other villagers in the night as it was late. But in the following morning he called P.W.2 and other villagers and narrated the incident before them. So, all of them went to the Police Station and lodged a report against the Appellant. On the basis of such report a case u/s 302. IPC was registered against the Appellant, pursuant to which investigation was carried on. The Investigation Officer visited the spot, held inquest over the dead body of Sania Challan. collected blood-stained earth and sample earth, examined witnesses, arrested the Appellant and after completion of investigation, submitted charge sheet in Court. 4. The defence plea was one of denial of the occurrence. The Appellant also pleaded his innocence. 5. In order to prove its case, prosecution had examined eight witnesses. The learned Sessions Judge on a brief resume of the evidence placed before her convicted the Appellant u/s 302, IPC. Being aggrieved with the conviction and sentence; the Appellant has preferred this appeal from jail. 6. In this case, P.W.5 who was the wife of the deceased, claimed to have seen the occurrence. She is the star witness to bring home the charge to the accused. To base a conviction, the evidence of the sole witness can be relied upon, if it is found to be cogent, clear, trust-worthy and unimpeachable in character. 6. In this case, P.W.5 who was the wife of the deceased, claimed to have seen the occurrence. She is the star witness to bring home the charge to the accused. To base a conviction, the evidence of the sole witness can be relied upon, if it is found to be cogent, clear, trust-worthy and unimpeachable in character. On a cursory glance at the evidence of P.W.5 we however noticed that the incident consisted of two parts (i) the injury on P.W.5 took place inside the house, (ii) the injury on the deceased Sania Challan took place in front of his house. From the testimony of P.W.5 the prosecution has proved that the Appellant went inside the deceased s house to invite him for a drink. When he resisted, the Appellant tried to drag him to the verandah. At that juncture, P.W.5 the wife of the deceased resisted the high-handed action of the Appellant. To prevent P.W.5 from disengaging him in dragging the deceased, the Appellant gave a stab blow to her which hit her index finger as a result of which she received injury. Thereafter, he dragged the deceased Sania Challan in front of the house and plunged a knife inside his chest. From her evidence it has been established that the deceased uttered that Hadi Sisa (the Appellant) was assaulting him. P.W.5 immediately rushed to the spot and noticed the Appellant plunging the knife in the chest of her husband. She left the spot out of fear we have closely examined the statement of P.W.5. In cross-examination, nothing worthwhile was elicited from her by-the defence counsel. Had the cross-examination been meaningful, something could have been elicited from the mouth of this witness. But however, we notice that the conduct of the State Defence Counsel was not quite appreciable inasmuch as he did not make any endeavour to elicit any answer which could have helped the defence, from this witness. 7. Keeping in view of the evidence of P.W.5 if we turn to the evidence of the Medical Officer, we find that the Medical Officer (P.W.4) noticed two external injuries on the chest of the deceased. Both-the injuries were ante mortem in nature and could cause death of ordinary course of nature. Therefore, there could be no manner of doubt that Sania Chalian met a homicidal death out of the injuries on his chest caused by a knife. 8. Both-the injuries were ante mortem in nature and could cause death of ordinary course of nature. Therefore, there could be no manner of doubt that Sania Chalian met a homicidal death out of the injuries on his chest caused by a knife. 8. Turning to the evidence of P.W.2, who is a post-occurrence witness, we find that he reached the place of occurrence on the following morning on being informed by P.W.5. He went to the Police Station and lodged a report. The Appellant also accompanied P.W.2 to the Police Station. No circumstance has been placed before us to impeach the credibility of P.W.2. Therefore, on a combined reading of the ocular evidence of P.Ws. 2 and 5, we are of the opinion that the accused Hadi Sisa gave such murderous blow by the knife on the chest of Sania Challan as a result of which he instantaneously died. 9. Although there has been no evidence produced by the prosecution with regard to the intention of the accused, but intention can well be gathered from the attending circumstance since the injuries were on the chest of the deceased, we have no hesitation to hold that the accused had the intention to do away with Sania Challan. 10. It is true that the seized articles were not placed before the learned Sessions Court. Regardless of the fact of non-production of those materials, the prosecution has been able to prove its case by sufficient evidence of unimpeachable character. We do not find any factual illegality or infirmity to have been committed by the trial Court so as to warrant our interference. 11. For the foregoing discussions, the appeal fails being devoid of any merit. The order of the trial Court convicting the Appellant u/s 302, IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life is hereby confirmed. 12. Before parting with the case, we would like to observe that the Sessions Judge before appointing State Defence Counsel to conduct a murder case should see that counsels having sufficient legal background are appointed as such, so that their assistance could be meaningful in arriving at an appropriate conclusion with regard to the guilt or otherwise of the accused. This order be communicated to all the Sessions Judges for taking appropriate steps. P.K. Misra, J. 13. I agree. Final Result : Dismissed