Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 810 (ORI)

MASI SANTA v. STATE OF ORISSA

2009-10-20

A.S.NAIDU, B.N.MAHAPATRA

body2009
JUDGMENT : A.S. Naidu, J. - The judgment passed by learned Sessions Judge, Koraput/Nabarangpur/Rayagada/Malkangiri at Jeypore in S.C. Case No. 183/1996 convicting the Appellant u/s 302 IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life is assailed in this appeal by the Appellant, who is in custody. 2. The incident took place way back in the year 1996. According to the prosecution on 23.5.1996 at about 2.00 P.M. the Appellant along with Kusta Santa, Majhi Santa and Sadu Santa returned home from Umerkote weekly market. The wife of Masi Santa asked him as to whether he has brought "Ladu" and "Lia" for the children from the market. Masi Santa answered in negative and said that he had no money. Thereafter a quarrel ensued between the husband and wife. At that juncture Sadu Santa (a neighbour) came and questioned Masi as to why he is quarreling with his wife. Being enraged by such interruption Masi Santa lifted a lathi lying in front of his house and gave a blow on the head of Sadu Santa, consequently he sustained bleeding injury and succumbed to the said injury. People standing nearby caught hold of Masi Santa and took away the lathi from his hand. At the intervention of some of the local people a "Panch" was called in the village and it was alleged that before the "Panch" the accused confessed to have killed the deceased. Lala Santa (P.W.1) reported the matter orally at Jharigaon P.S. The said report was reduced to writing and was registered as P.S. Case No. 10/1996. The Officer-in-charge thereafter proceeded with the investigation and in course thereof examined the witnesses, visited the spot seized the weapon of offence, collected the blood stained earth, seized the lungi of the accused and wearing apparels of the deceased, sent the seized materials for chemical examination, held inquest of the dead body and sent the same for post mortem examination and after arresting the accused and completing investigation submitted charge sheet in the Court of learned J.M.F.C, Umerkote in G.R. Case No. 183/1996. Learned J.M.F.C. after verifying the police records and on being satisfied that a prima facie case is made out, took cognizance of the offence and committed the case for trial. 3. The accused pleaded innocence. In order to substantiate their case, the prosecution got examined five witnesses and exhibited eleven documents. Five material objects were also marked. Learned J.M.F.C. after verifying the police records and on being satisfied that a prima facie case is made out, took cognizance of the offence and committed the case for trial. 3. The accused pleaded innocence. In order to substantiate their case, the prosecution got examined five witnesses and exhibited eleven documents. Five material objects were also marked. On behalf of the defence neither any witness was examined nor any document was exhibited. Out of the witnesses, P.W.1 is the informant, P.Ws.2, 3 and 4 were witnesses to the seizure of different articles and P.W.5 was the Investigating Officer. 4. Learned Sessions Judge, after vivid discussion of the evidence in extenso came to the conclusion that the prosecution was able to establish their charges against the accused beyond all reasonable doubts, found him guilty u/s 302 IPC and convicted him thereunder. The said judgment and order of conviction is assailed mainly on the ground that there is no material evidence to connect the Appellant with the alleged crime. It is stated that learned Sessions Judge has not considered the evidence carefully and the conclusions arrived at are based more on surmises and conjectures than merit of the evidence. According to the Appellant the evidence adduced is full of contradictions and it is a fit case where the order of-conviction needs to be set aside. 5. Learned counsel for, the State, on the other hand, strenuously submitted that the oral evidence clearly establishes the fact that the accused dealt a blow with a lathi on the head of Sadu Santa which proved to be fatal. The said fact having been established beyond any reasonable doubt, learned Sessions Judge has rightly convicted the Appellant. 6. In order to appreciate the submissions, this Court meticulously went through the evidence, both oral and documentary. P.W.1, the informant, is also an eye witness to the occurrence. The evidence of said witness along with the evidence of P.Ws.2 and 3 reveals that on the date of occurrence a quarrel ensued between Masi Santa and his wife. All of a sudden, the deceased came and challenged Masi Santa as to why he is quarreling with his wife. Masi Santa questioned him as to why he is interfering in his family affairs. All of a sudden, the deceased came and challenged Masi Santa as to why he is quarreling with his wife. Masi Santa questioned him as to why he is interfering in his family affairs. When the deceased proceeded being enraged the accused picked up a wooden lathi which was lying near his house and gave a blow on the head of deceased. Dr. Gopal Patra, who conducted the post mortem examination, submitted post mortem report, which was marked as Ext.15. The said report reveals that the cause of death to be hemorrhage and shock due to fracture of skull and injury to brain tissues and death was homicidal in nature. That apart, it appears, the deceased confessed before the villages, the weapon of offence (lathi) was seized on the basis of a confession made by him and the said statement is admissible u/s 27 of the Evidence Act. The seizure of lathi was also proved beyond all reasonable doubts. A cumulative assessment of all the evidence thus leads to an irresistible conclusion that Sadu Santa died as a result of the blow given by the accused on his head by a lathi and this Court is also satisfied that the prosecution was able to establish the involvement of the Appellant with the alleged crime. 7. The scenario of facts discussed above further reveals that the incident took place on the spur of the moment. The ccused had no premeditation to assault Sadu Santa. In course of altercation and in a heat of passion he dealt a single blow which proved to be fatal. Under such circumstances and on being satisfied that the Appellant had no intention to cause the death of Sadu Santa, this Court feels that the offence would be culpable homicide not amounting the murder within the meaning of Exception-4 of Section 300 IPC. Accordingly, we set aside the order of conviction u/s 302 IPC and modify it to conviction u/s 304 Part-ll IPC. It appears that the Appellant is in custody for about thirteen years. Accordingly, we also set aside the sentence of imprisonment for life and impose a sentence for the period already undergone by the Appellant. It is needless to say that if the presence of the Appellant is not necessary in respect of any other case, he shall be released forthwith. With the aforesaid modification, the JCRL is disposed of. B.N. Mahapatra, J. 8. It is needless to say that if the presence of the Appellant is not necessary in respect of any other case, he shall be released forthwith. With the aforesaid modification, the JCRL is disposed of. B.N. Mahapatra, J. 8. I agree.