Judgment : ( 1 ) THE appellant, Fagu oraon, was tried and convicted under Section 302 I. P. C. He was sentenced to imprisonment for life. The allegation against him is that at 10. 00 p. m. on 15-7-1995, he beat the deceased Jitbahan Yadav, the uncle of p. W. 9 Lalmohan Yadav, with lathi on account of prior motive. The trial Judge, finding the appellant guilty, sentenced him to imprisonment for life. The appeal is against the said conviction and sentence. ( 2 ) THERE was a land dispute between the deceased Jitbahan Yadav and the accused appellant Fagu Oraon. This is said to be the motive for the occurrence. On 15-7-1995, jitbahan Yadav accompanied by his nephew, p. W. 9 Lalmohan Yadav, was proceeding to village Lalpur from village Kundo after visiting p. W. 2 Deo Mohan Yadav, who is the brother of P. W. 9. When the deceased and p. W. 9 were at Jogi Garden, P. W. 9 sat down to pass urine. Jitbahan Yadav was waling and walked to a distance 10-15 yards. At that time, appellant Fagu Oraon accompanied with two other unknown persons reached the place and the appellant beat the deceased with a lathi. On seeing this, P. W. 9 questioned him and he was also beaten. On being beaten, P. W. 9 ran from the place to village Kundo where he informed his brother Deo Mohan Yadav (P. W. 2 ). Thereafter P. W. 2 and P. W. 9 along with other villagers returned to the place where Jitbahan yadav was beaten. They found Jitbahan yadav with bleeding injuries. Villagers removed Jitbahan yadav to Gumla State Dispensary for treatment. The Medical Officer-in-charge of Gumla State Dispensary sent O. D. Slip to the police station, on receipt of which P. W. 10, Bishamber Jha, after making station entry in the Station Diary, went to Gumla State Dispensary where, finding p. W. 9, questioned him. P. W. 9 gave a statement, ext. 4 and the said complaint, Ext. 4, was registered at the police station as a crime. Investigation in the crime was conducted by P. W. 10, who proceeded to the hospital and on being informed that jitbahan Yadav died while undergoing treatment, conducted inquest by preparing inquest report, Ext. 5. The Officer also issued requisition requesting the Doctor to conduct autopsy. 4, was registered at the police station as a crime. Investigation in the crime was conducted by P. W. 10, who proceeded to the hospital and on being informed that jitbahan Yadav died while undergoing treatment, conducted inquest by preparing inquest report, Ext. 5. The Officer also issued requisition requesting the Doctor to conduct autopsy. ( 3 ) ON receipt of the requisition, P. W. 3, dr. Hemant Kumar, conducted autopsy on the dead body of Jitbahan Yadav and he found the following injuries :-"1. Lacerated injury size 3" x 1" x bone deep over posterior part of parietal region of the head. 2. Bruise size 1" x 1" over left side of forehead with fracture of frontal bone, brain matter congested and blood clot present. 3. Lacerated injury size 2" x 1" x brain deep over left parietal region of the head with fracture of underlying bone. Brain matter congested and blood clot present. 4. Lacerated injury size 2" x 1" x bone deep over right parietal region of the head. 5. Lacerated injury size 2" x 1" x brain deep over right fronto parietal region of the head with fracture of underlying bones. Brain matter congested and blood clot present. 6. Abrasion size 1" x 1" over front of upper part of left thigh. "the Doctor issued Ext. 1, the post mortem certificate, with his opinion that the injury nos. 1, 4 and 6 are simple in nature and injury Nos. 2, 3 and 5 are grievous and they are independently or cumulatively sufficient, in the ordinary course of nature, to cause death. ( 4 ) AFTER the Completion of investigation, final report was filed and the appellant denied all the incriminating circumstances. ( 5 ) LEARNED counsel, appearing for the appellant, contends that since the occurrence had taken place at 10. 00 p. m. near a forest, it would have been impossible for P. W. 9 to have identified the assailant and therefore, the appellant is entitled to an acquittal. On the above contention, we have heard mr. Aloke Lal, learned counsel appearing for the State. ( 6 ) JITBAHAN Yadav died on account of homicidal violence stands established through the evidence of the Doctor, P. W. 3, who conducted autopsy and who issued Ext. 1, the post mortem certificate. On the above contention, we have heard mr. Aloke Lal, learned counsel appearing for the State. ( 6 ) JITBAHAN Yadav died on account of homicidal violence stands established through the evidence of the Doctor, P. W. 3, who conducted autopsy and who issued Ext. 1, the post mortem certificate. ( 7 ) IT is the case of the prosecution that on account of a land dispute between the appellant and the deceased, the occurrence took place at 10. 00 p. m. on 15-7-1995. According to P. W. 9, he and Jitbahan Yadav visited the house of Deo Mohan Yadav in the village Kundo and after taking dinner, they were proceeding to village Lalpur. He has further stated that at about 10. 00 p. m. , when they were near Jogi Garden, the appellant, who appeared before them, beat the deceased, when he was passing urine; at that time two others persons were also present with the appellant. According to P. W. 9, on seeing the assault, he questioned the appellant and the appellant beat him. P. W. 9 stated that he went to village Kundo and informed his brother Deo Mohan Yadav (P. W. 2) and thereafter the villagers came to the scene, who, on finding Jitbahan Yadav with blood stain injuries removed him to the hospital where he died. On going through the evidence of P. W. 9, we are fully satisfied that his evidence is trustworthy and it is supported by other materials like that for the occurrence which had taken place at 10. 00 p. m. , the injured was removed to the hospital immediately thereafter, an O. D. Slip was sent from the medical authorities and on receiving the same, P. W. 10, the Police officer, went to the Gumla State Dispensary where, on finding P. W. 9, questioned him and recorded the statement, Ext. 4. If P. W. 9 was not with the deceased at the time of occurrence, then the deceased could not have been taken to the State Dispensary immediately after the incident, since the case of the prosecution that the deceased was alive when he was produced before the Doctor is not disputed by the accused. It, therefore, shows that immediately after the incident, the injured was removed by P. W. 9 and other villagers. In the complaint, Ext. It, therefore, shows that immediately after the incident, the injured was removed by P. W. 9 and other villagers. In the complaint, Ext. 4, P. W. 9 has also stated that he was beaten by the appellant, when questioned by him as to why he is beating the deceased with lathi. The evidence of P. W. 9 that after taking dinner in the house of P. W. 2, they were proceeding to village Lalpur is also supported by the finding noted by the Doctor in the post mortem certificate. We have perused the post mortem certificate, Ext. 1. Ext. 1 shows that the Doctor found partly undigested meat food with watery liquid in the stomach of the deceased, which shows that the deceased and P. W. 9 were in the house of P. W. 2 Deo Mohan yadav and after taking the dinner in his house left the village Kundo and were proceeding towards Lalpur and that the occurrence took place at 10. 00 p. m. , when they were on their way. P. W. 2 also, in his evidence, stated that P. W, 9 and deceased came to his house, stayed there for sometime, took meal and later left for village lalpur. According to him, P. W. 9 returned to his house and informed him that the deceased was beaten by the appellant. The evidence of P. W. 9 is, therefore, corroborated not only by the medical evidence, but also by the oral evidence of P. W. 2. We, therefore, do not find any reason to reject the evidence of P. W. 9. ( 8 ) THE contention of the counsel for the appellant that since the occurrence took place at 10,00 p. m. , P. W. 9 could not have been in a position to Identify the accused is to be stated only to be rejected. P. W. 9 categorically in his evidence stated that when he sat down to pass urine, he found the appellant beating the deceased with lathi and when he questioned, he was also beaten by the appellant. The appellant was known to P. W. 9 even earlier to the date of incident and in fact, he was also beaten by the appellant when questioned by him. We, therefore, find no merit in the contention of the learned counsel. The appellant was known to P. W. 9 even earlier to the date of incident and in fact, he was also beaten by the appellant when questioned by him. We, therefore, find no merit in the contention of the learned counsel. ( 9 ) ON the discussion made above, we are of the view that the conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant are to be confirmed and accordingly is confirmed. This appeal is dismissed. Appeal dismissed. --- *** --- .