JUDGMENT : A.S. Naidu, J. - The judgment dated 14th August, 1996 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kalahandi-Nuapada at Bhawanipatna acquitting the accused from the charge u/s 302 of the Indian Penal Code in S.C. No. 43/1995 is assailed by the State of Orissa in this Government Appeal. 2. Bereft of unnecessary details the short facts as spelt out from the F.I.R filed by P.W. 5 is that in the early morning of 17.5.1995 accused Rekard Singh Patra committed murder of his father Makunda Patra while he was sleeping by dealing tangi blows on his back, chest, shoulder and on his left hand near the wrist joint thereby his left palm got severed from the hand. It is further alleged that there was prior enmity between the accused Rekard Singh Patra and the family of the deceased and to squench his anger, the accused entered into the house and assaulted his father. 3. After receiving F.I.R. investigation was made by O.I.C., Jaipatna P.S. and after completion of investigation charge sheet was submitted in G.R. Case No. 186/1995 of the court of learned S.D.J.M., Kalahandi. Learned S.D.J.M. after perusing the charge sheet and on being satisfied took cognizance of the offence and thereafter committed the said case to the court of Session for trial. 4. The plea of the accused was complete denial. It is further averred that a false case has been foisted against him due to prior enmity. 5. In order to substantiate its case, prosecution got examined nine witnesses. Out of them, the prosecution mainly relies on the evidence of P. Ws.2, 5 and 6, who are the two sons and wife of the deceased respectively. P. Ws.2 and 5 were the post occurrence witnesses, whereas P.W. 6 was the only eye witness. 6. It appears from the evidence that P.W. 6 initially supported the prosecution case at the time of investigation, but in court she had clearly stated that assault was given by one Manjit Patra and not by the accused Rekard Singh Patra. Learned Sessions Judge after discussing the evidence, both oral and documentary, came to the conclusion that the prosecution had totally failed to substantiate its case against the accused and acquitted him u/s 235(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure 7. In course of hearing learned Addl. Learned Sessions Judge after discussing the evidence, both oral and documentary, came to the conclusion that the prosecution had totally failed to substantiate its case against the accused and acquitted him u/s 235(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure 7. In course of hearing learned Addl. Standing Counsel once again placed the evidence of all the witnesses and submitted that learned Sessions Judge had acted illegally in acquitting the accused though enough materials were available against him. 8. To appreciate the arguments advanced by Learned Counsel for the State, this Court once again went through the evidence. As stated earlier the only three relevant witnesses are P. Ws.2, 5 and 6. Out of them P. Ws.2 and 5 were post occurrence witnesses whereas P.W. 6 was the only eye witness. Perusal of the evidence of P.W. 6 reveals that she had not supported the prosecution case at all. She had implicated one Manjit Patra. Though she was cross-examined at length, nothing could be elucidated from her to disbelieve the statement made by her in court. The prosecution also placed reliance on the dying declaration. But then, in view of the evidence of P.W. 6 the dying declaration, which is said to have been made before her, loses its importance. 9. On going through the entire evidence, this Court finds that the learned Sessions Judge has not committed any infirmity or illegality. He has discussed the evidence in extenso and the conclusions arrived at are just and proper. After other going through the judgment and materials, this Court is also satisfied that the prosecution has failed to substantiate its case against the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. 10. In view of the aforesaid discussions, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order of acquittal. Accordingly, the Government Appeal stands dismissed. S.C. Parija, J. 11. I agree. Final Result : Dismissed