JUDGMENT : B. Panigrahi, J. - In this appeal the appellant has challenged the legality, propriety and validity of the order of conviction and sentence u/s 302, IPC passed by the Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj, Baripada, in Sessions Trial No. 207 of 1993 directing him to undergo imprisonment for life. 2. The essential facts leading to this appeal are as follows : On 18.7.1993, the informant Budhan Marandi was working along with Kundi Marandi (deceased), Pio Marandi, Baha Majhi, Chaitan Majhi, Laxman Hembram, Balia Majhi and Gangadhar Patra in the construction work of a house of one Akuli Behera in Ward No. 9 of Rairangpur town. During lunch time between 1.30 P.M. and 2.00 P.M. while all the above persons were taking their lunch in a half constructed house belonging to one Narendra Kumar Singh situated near their place of work, the appellant, who was the husband of the deceased Kundi Marandi, entered into the said house and without any rhyme or reason plunged successive knife blows on the deceased from her back side. Kundi Marandi after receiving injuries came out of the room and fell down there. The appellant after inflicting such injuries on Kundi Marandi fled away from the spot. The informant and others, who were taking their meal, chased the appellant but could not over power him. After returning to the scene of occurrence, they found Kundi Marandi lying in front of the said house. One of the lady labourers, namely Baha Majhi, brought out the knife from her body. Thereafter, the injured was kept on a cot which was brought from one Akuli Behera. While being shifted to the hospital, on the way she expired. 3. From the evidence of the prosecution, it has clearly transpired that there was no love-lust between the appellant and the deceased There was always rancour and bitter feeling between them. Prior to the incident in question the appellant had made successive attempts on her life, but had failed. The matter was reported by Budhan Marandi before the police vide Ext. 6 at the spot on the same day, on the basis of which a case was registered whereupon investigation was taken up. During investigation the knjfe (M.O.I.) was seized vide Ext. 5. Further seizures were made vide Exts. 3 and 4. The Investigating Officer examined witnesses, sent the dead-body for post-mortem examination. The post-mortem report was received vide Ext. 1. 6 at the spot on the same day, on the basis of which a case was registered whereupon investigation was taken up. During investigation the knjfe (M.O.I.) was seized vide Ext. 5. Further seizures were made vide Exts. 3 and 4. The Investigating Officer examined witnesses, sent the dead-body for post-mortem examination. The post-mortem report was received vide Ext. 1. On query made by the Investigating Officer, the Medical Officer opined that the injuries could be possible by a weapon like M.O.I., vide Ext 2. After the post-mortem examination the clothes worn by the deceased were seized. It was found that there was a hole on the back side of the blouse belonging to the deceased which tallied with the penetrating injury by M.O.I. The incriminating materials were sent for chemical examination and those reports were marked as Exts. 11 and 12. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was placed against the appellant. 4. The plea of the appellant was one of denial of the occurrence. 5. In all five witnesses were examined by the prosecution. P.W. 1 was the Doctor who conducted post-mortem examination. P.W. 2 was the A.S.I. of Police who had drawn up the formal FIR, Ext.6/4. P. W. 3 was the owner of the half constructed house where the incident had taken place. P.Ws. 4 and 5 were the eye witnesses, who presented vivid picture of the incident. 6. Mr. Das, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has fervently pleaded that the FIR which was marked as Ext. 6 should not be taken into account as it was hit u/s 162, Cr.P.C. It has been brought to our notice that prior to lodging the FIR an information was sent by P,W. 3, owner of the half constructed house that there was an incident of death inside his house. The A.S.I, on the basis of such information rushed to the spot. On perusal of the evidence of the A.S.I. (P.W. 2) it appears that after being heard from P.W. 3, he rushed to the spot and the informant verbally explained the incident to him which was reduced to writing, where the informant, Budhan Marandi had signed. Neither the diary was produced before the court nor any description was narrated, save and except there was an incident of homicidal death inside the house of P.W. 3. Therefore, such information being a telephonic message, was not recorded as FIR. Neither the diary was produced before the court nor any description was narrated, save and except there was an incident of homicidal death inside the house of P.W. 3. Therefore, such information being a telephonic message, was not recorded as FIR. But on receiving said information when P.W. 2 arrived at the spot and received a report from Budhan Marandi, he registered it as FIR and proceeded with investigation. The FIR was marked as Ext. 6. Therefore, we are of the firm opinion that the information lodged by Budhan Marandi cannot be hit u/s 162, Cr.P.C. 7. Mr. Das, advanced his second limb of argument by stating that even assuming that Ext. 6 is treated as FIR then the author of the FfR having not been examined, therefore, the prosecution case should be thrown over board for such non-examination. We do not find any merit in such submission because the prosecution can prove its case by examining other witnesses and if their evidence is credible, trustworthy and confidence inspiring, then, on the basis of such evidence the appellant can be convicted. 8. In this case we found P.Ws. 4 and 5 have claimed to be the eye witnesses. On scrutiny of the evidence of P.W. 4 it appears that on the date of incident when he along with other male and female labourers were engaged in taking their lunch in a half constructed house nearby, the appellant suddenly appeared and caught hold of the neck of the deceased and stabbed her with a knife from her back. After inflicting such injury the appellant went away. The knife was sticking to the body of the deceased Kundi Marandi who was seriously injured. She tried to come out from the half constructed house and after going a little distance, she fell down unconscious. P.W. 4 along with others chased the accused, but could not apprehend him. Thereafter, they came and found the deceased Kundi Marandi lying dead. They lifted Kundi Marandi on to a cot. The female labourer Baha Majhi pulled out the knife from the body of Kundi Marandi and placed the knife near the deceased. She identified M.O.I., the knife, used by the appellant and M.O.II, the blouse worn by the deceased at the time of occurrence. Though this witness was Santala by caste, but she understood Oriya. Deceased Kundi Marandi was her co-villager. She identified M.O.I., the knife, used by the appellant and M.O.II, the blouse worn by the deceased at the time of occurrence. Though this witness was Santala by caste, but she understood Oriya. Deceased Kundi Marandi was her co-villager. Although this witness was subjected to incisive and strenuous cross-examination, but nothing could turn out from her testimony. Therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve her statement. P.W. 5 was very close to the appellant and he also corroborated the testimony of P.W. 4. He found the appellant running away immediately after the incident. He chased him, but somehow or other could not apprehend him. Therefore, on a combined reading of the evidence of P.Ws. 4 and 5 there could be no room of doubt that it was the appellant who had inflicted the injury on Kundi Marandi and, thereafter, ran away from the spot. 9. Now turning to the evidence of P.W. 1 it is found that he was working as a Medical Officer in Sub-Divisional Hospital Rairangpur. He conducted the post-mortem examination over the deadbody of the deceased and found a stab wound on the left scapular region at the middle of middle border of size 11/2" x 3/4" x chest cavity deep. On dissection he noticed that the stab injury was between 4th and 5th rib. Heura over the left lung, left lung was punctured and pleural cavity was filled with blood. The death was on account of haemorrhage and shock and might have been caused by a knife like M.O.I. There was a hole noticed on the blouse of the deceased (M.O.II) which tallied with the size of the knife. 10. Now referring to the evidence of P.W. 2 it appears that he was working as A.S.I. of Rairangpur Town Police Station on 19.7.1.993. He has proved the seizure of the sample blood and blotting paper contained the blood of the deceased as per the Serologist, Ext. 4. From his evidence it has further transpired that one Girija Bhusan Nanda was attached as S.I. of Police in Rairangpur town P.S. He has proved the FIR, written by Mr. Nanda, S.I. of Police vide Ext. 6. Sufficient steps were taken for service of summons upon the Investigating Officer. But such notice could not be served, since his whereabouts could not be ascertained. P.W. 2 drew up the FIR which was registered as P.S. Case No. 51 of 1993. Nanda, S.I. of Police vide Ext. 6. Sufficient steps were taken for service of summons upon the Investigating Officer. But such notice could not be served, since his whereabouts could not be ascertained. P.W. 2 drew up the FIR which was registered as P.S. Case No. 51 of 1993. A severe criticism has been made by Mr. Das of non-examination of the Investigating Officer. It has been strenuously argued that since the Investigating Officer has not been examined, therefore, the prosecution case should be rejected on that ground alone. Several grounds could have been elicited from the mouth of the Investigating Officer. From the facts and circumstances of the case, we found that the Court took several steps directing the I.O. to remain present, but it could not be served on account of his non-availability and as his whereabouts could not be ascertained. Therefore, in this background non-examination of the Investigating Officer should not be attributed against the prosecution. Moreover, the appellant however could not satisfy us as to how and why he would be prejudiced on account of such non-examination of the I.O., rather, from the facts proved in this case, we found no prejudice had been caused to the appellant. There has been no inconsistency in the statements of P.Ws. 4 and 5 who are said to be the eye witnesses. Therefore, in our opinion; non-examination of the Investigating Officer will not be fatal to the prosecution case. In this connection we rely upon a judgment reported in Ajit Kumar Vasantlal Zaveri Vs. State of Gujarat. This was a case u/s 161, IPC and Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of corruption Act, 1947. In that case the I.O. was not examined and a plea was taken before the Supreme Court for acquittal of the accused on that ground. But the Hon'ble Supreme Court rejected such plea on the ground that all other circumstances were taken into consideration and there were cogent and convincing reasons for accepting the prosecution case and dismissed the appeal with modification of sentence. 11. On the basis of the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court, it cannot be held that non-examination of the Investigating Officer would be fatal to the prosecution. 12. In view of the above discussions, we hold that there is no merit in this appeal. 11. On the basis of the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court, it cannot be held that non-examination of the Investigating Officer would be fatal to the prosecution. 12. In view of the above discussions, we hold that there is no merit in this appeal. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence passed u/s 302, IPC by the learned Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj, Baripada directing the appellant to undergo imprisonment for life are hereby confirmed. Ch. P.K. Misra, J. 13. I agree. Final Result : Dismissed