JUDGMENT : 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 2.8.2001 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar in Sessions Trial No. 45 of 1998 convicting the Appellant for commission of offences under Sections 302/323 I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life under Sections 302 I.P.C. No separate sentence has been passed for conviction u/s 323 I.P.C. 2. P.W. 1, the informant Smt. Manju Purty is the deceased Minati's elder sister. The Appellant married Bela, the younger sister of the informant. P.W. 2 is the informant's son whereas P.W. 3 is the informant's husband. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased had married to one Pahad Singh Badra and they were staying at Bhubaneswar. The Appellant and Bela were initially staying at Daitary. Thereafter, they shifted to Bhubaneswar and resided for some days with the deceased and Pahad Singh Badra. While they were residing in Bhubaneswar, the Appellant suspected the relationship between his wife and Pahad Singh Badra and, for that reason, left the house of Pahad Singh. After staying for some days at Bhubaneswar, he returned to Daitary. There was ill-feeling between the Appellant on the one hand and the informant, P.W. 1, P.W. 3, the deceased and the deceased's husband on the other. On the date of occurrence i.e. on 9.11.1997, the deceased with her husband came to the house of P.W. 1 at Daitary. At about 8.30 to 9 P.M., the informant, her husband P.W. 3 and. P.W. 2 along with the deceased and her husband Pahad Singh were sitting in the house of P.W. 3 and enjoying liquor and discussing about the Appellant and his wife Bela when the occurrence took place. It is alleged that, all on a sudden, the Appellant came into the room with a wooden plank and gave out that as his wife had been separated from him, he would likewise separate the wife of Pahad Singh, and thereafter dealt successive blows with the wooden plank on the head of the deceased causing severe bleeding injuries as a result of which she fell down and became senseless upon which the Appellant dealt Anr. blow with the said wooden plank on the deceased's leg. When P.W. 3 and Pahad Singh intervened, the Appellant dealt blows also with the said wooden plank on their heads. blow with the said wooden plank on the deceased's leg. When P.W. 3 and Pahad Singh intervened, the Appellant dealt blows also with the said wooden plank on their heads. When P.W. 1 raised alarm, the Appellant escaped from the house with the said wooden plank. Thereafter, the deceased was taken to Daitary Hospital where the doctor after giving first-aid advised her to shift the deceased to S.C.B. Medical College, Cuttack. The deceased was brought back to P.W. 1's house and on the very same night, she succumbed to the injuries. On the next morning, on the oral report of P.W. 1, an F.I.R. was registered and investigation was taken up. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the Appellant for commission of the aforesaid offences. 3. The plea of the Appellant was one of complete denial of the charges. 4. Prosecution examined eight witnesses to establish the charges. P.Ws. 1 to 3 have already been referred to above. P.W. 4 is a witness to inquest over the dead body of the deceased. P.W. 5 is a witness to seizure of split wood and clothes. P.W. 6 is the doctor who examined the injured persons P.W. 3 and Pahad Singh Badra. P.W. 7 is the doctor who conducted post mortem examination over the dead body of the deceased. P.W. 8 is the Investigating Officer. The learned trial Court having relied upon the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3 coupled with the medical evidence available from P.Ws. 6 and 7 found the Appellant guilty of the charges. 5. In assailing the impugned judgment and order, it is contended by the learned Counsel for the Appellant that in the absence of independent corroboration the learned trial Court should not have relied upon the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3, who are closely related to the deceased. It is further contended that the learned trial Court has failed to take note of the discrepancies appearing in the evidence of the eye-witnesses. 6. In reply, it is submitted by the learned Counsel for the State that on the face of unimpeachable evidence establishing the complicity of the Appellant with the commission of murder of the deceased as well as assault on P.W. 3 and the deceased's husband, there is no scope to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of conviction. 7. We have carefully scrutinized the evidence on record. 7. We have carefully scrutinized the evidence on record. P.W. 1 deposes that the deceased was his elder sister and the Appellant married his younger sister Bela. The occurrence took place during evening time at about 8.30 P.M., when P.W. 1, P.W. 2, P.W. 3, the deceased and the deceased's husband Pahad Singh Badra were talking. It is in the evidence of P.W. 1 that the deceased was residing with her husband at Bhubaneswar and on the date of occurrence, both of them had come to her house. Prior to the occurrence, the Appellant and his wife Bela were living separately. Bela was residing with Pahad Singh at Bhubaneswar whereas the Appellant was residing at Daitari. When P.W. 1 and others were discussing in her house to bring a settlement between the Appellant and his wife Bela, the Appellant suddenly came there and first assaulted the deceased with a wooden plank on her head and thereafter assaulted with the said wooden plank on the head of P.W. 3 and Pahad Singh. All of them sustained bleeding injuries on their heads. She has specifically stated that the deceased had received three bleeding injuries on her head and the Appellant also assaulted the deceased with the said wooden plank on her leg. Due to such assault, the deceased fell down being senseless upon which P.W. 1 raised alarm to attract the neighbours upon which the Appellant ran away towards the nearby jungle. She also testifies that before assaulting, the Appellant gave out that since his wife had been taken away from him, he will also take away the wife of Pahad Singh. P.W. 1 deposes that the deceased was taken to hospital for treatment where the doctor advised for immediate shifting of the deceased to Cuttack Medical, which could not be arranged at once, for which the deceased was brought back to her house. On the same night at about 3.00 A.M., the deceased succumbed to the injuries. She also deposes that on the next morning at about 8.00 A.M., she went to Daitari Police Station with her son and lodged oral report, which was reduced into writing by the police. Though P.W. 1 has been cross-examined at length, her evidence has not been discredited in any manner. Also her evidence gets material corroboration from the contents of the F.I.R marked Ext. 1. Though P.W. 1 has been cross-examined at length, her evidence has not been discredited in any manner. Also her evidence gets material corroboration from the contents of the F.I.R marked Ext. 1. Therefore, P.W. 1 on her own appears to be a firm and wholly reliable witness whose evidence can be relied upon without corroboration. However, P.Ws. 2 and 3 also support the evidence of P.W.1 in all material particulars. P.W. 2 deposes regarding the relationship among the Appellant, deceased Minati and deceased's husband. P.W.2 also says that the deceased along with her husband Pahad Singh had come to their house from Bhubaneswar on the date of occurrence. In the evening, his parents, the deceased, the deceased's husband and P.W. 2 were discussing regarding settlement of the dispute between the Appellant and his wife. P.W. 2 testifies that the Appellant suddenly entered into the room and dealt a kick to his mother. Thereafter, the Appellant gave out that as his wife had been taken away from him likewise he would separate the deceased Minati from her husband and started assaulting the deceased with a wooden plank as a result of which the deceased sustained bleeding injuries on her head. He also states that when his father P.W. 3 and Pahad Singh intervened, they were also assaulted by the Appellant with the said wooden plank resulting in bleeding injuries on their heads. Due to such assault, the deceased fell down being unconscious. When P.W. 1 raised alarm, the Appellant escaped towards the nearby jungle with the split wood. P.W. 2 also says that the deceased was taken to hospital by P.W. 1 but was brought back to their house as the doctor advised for shifting of the deceased to Cuttack Medical College and on the very same night at about 3.00 A.M., the deceased succumbed to the injuries. P.W. 3 also vividly narrates the occurrence and states that when discussion was going on for settlement of the dispute between the Appellant and his wife as they were living separately, the Appellant all on a sudden appeared in their house with a split wood and dealt blows on the head of the deceased causing bleeding injuries resulting in loss of her sense. On their intervention, the Appellant assaulted him and Pahad Singh also with the said wooden plank on their heads causing bleeding injuries. On their intervention, the Appellant assaulted him and Pahad Singh also with the said wooden plank on their heads causing bleeding injuries. P.W. 3 deposes to have sustained injuries on his left forehead and over the skull. He also deposes that the deceased was taken to hospital and brought back after first aid as the doctor advised to shift the deceased to Cuttack Medical and in that night at about 3.00 A.M., the deceased died. It is in the evidence of P.W. 3 that he as well as Pahad Singh were treated for head injuries. P.W. 3 says that the injured Pahad Singh expired about a year after the occurrence. Thus, it is found that both P.Ws. 2 and 3 are firm witnesses each of whom independently corroborates the evidence of P.W. 1. P.W. 7, the doctor who conducted post mortem examination over the dead body of the deceased, found three lacerated wounds on the deceased's head and one lacerated wound on the deceased's leg below ankle joint. The cause of death of the deceased is stated to be due to brain injury and haemorrhage. The injuries were sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. It is also opined by P.W. 7 that the injuries on the deceased could be caused by the seized split wood M.O.I. Thus, the medical evidence of the doctor P.W. 7 as regards the fatal injuries on the deceased also corroborates the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3. P.W. 6 is the doctor who examined the injured person Pahad Singh Badra on 10.11.1997 and found one abrasion on his left fore-arm and one lacerated wound on his scalp parietal region left side. He also examined the injured Kache Purty P.W. 3 and found one lacerated wound on his scalp forehead. The injuries are stated to have been caused by hard and blunt weapon. Thus, the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3 with regard to assault by the Appellant on the injured persons also gets corroboration from the medical evidence. 8. On analysis of the entire evidence on record, it is found that the prosecution has adduced unimpeachable evidence of the eyewitnesses to establish the charges that the Appellant all on a sudden being armed with a split wood entered into the informant's house while the deceased along with others were present and dealt fatal blows on the head of the deceased. The Appellant also assaulted the injured persons, P.W. 3 and Pahad Singh Badra with the said split wood causing bleeding injuries. 9. In the circumstances, we find that the learned trial court was justified in holding that the Appellant is guilty of the charges under Sections 302/323 I.P.C. Therefore, we find no ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar in Sessions Trial No. 45 of 1998 against the Appellant. Accordingly, the Jail Criminal Appeal is dismissed. L. Mohapatra, J. 10. I agree. Final Result : Dismissed